Manitoba Hansard — 7 April 1966 (Sitting 70, 27th Legislature, 5th Session)

27-5-70

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

1623 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8:00 o'clock, Thursday, April 7, 1966 MADAM SPEAKER: I would like to thank the Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre for taking my place this afternoon while I made an unexpected visit to the dentist, and I under stand now that you are on the second reading of Bill No. 75. MR. SMELLIE presented Bill �o. 75,

an Act to amend The Municipal Act, for second readi ng. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. HON. ROBERT G. SMELLIE, Q.C. (Minister of Municipal Affairs) (Birtle-Russell): Madam Speaker, this is the general amending statute of The Municipal Act and that we've become accustomed to each year. It's a little hard to discuss the principles of a bill such as this because there are many principles involved. I might, however, deal with some of the things that are involved in this bill that members might be interested in, and then we will attempt to answer any questions that may arise.

First of all, there are some directions given to the Municipal Board concerning the settle ment of amounts due from one municipality to another where there is a change in boundaries, and members will note that the Municipal Board is authorized to prescribe that such settlements may be made over extended periods of time rather than in one lump sum.

There is an amend ment which would allow the investment of pension funds for municipal employees in the securi ties of a trust company authorized to carry on business in Manitoba, and provision is also made for the integration of municipal pension funds with the Canada Pension Plan. At the same time, the limit that was imposed upon contributions to municipal pension plans is raised from five percent of earnings to six percent in line with The Teachers' Retirement Act and The Civil Service Superannuation Fund. In the

section dealing with Community Centres, in the past the

section we believed covered the cooperation between municipalities for the erection of such centres. However, a question has arisen as to whether more than two municipalities could legally join for such purpose, and you will find amendments which now provide for joining with one or more additional municipal ities to make certain that this point is covered. There is a new

section added allowing for the establishment of reserve funds for municipal ly owned and operated utilities, which requires certain approvals by the Public Utilities Board and which would provide that the monies cannot be spent for any other purpose without the permis sion of that board.

Some problems have arisen where we have come across municipalities who have had trouble with the accounts of unincorporated village districts within their boundaries, and in the past there has been no provision for the auditing of the accounts of the unincorporated village district by the municipal auditor, and there have been some cases where the unincorpo rated village districts have not in fact even filed statements of their accounts with the municipal ity, so there is an amendment here which would make it mandatory for the auditor to audit the statements of the unincorporated village district committee when he's doing the municipal audit.

Members will note, too, that there are some additions to the methods for the levying of taxes for local improvements. In the past generally the special tax for local improvements had been levied as a frontage tax. In some instances it has also baen levied as a mill rate against the assessment of the properties involved. In many areas where there is new development going on and where the land is not necessarily subdivided when the local improvement works are desired to be undertaken, it will make a provision now that the levy can be placed against the area on an acreage basis . .

Amendments are also introduced in this Act which will enable mlinicipalities to take action to control the plant pest known as Dutch Elm disease, and there is an amendment to the

section of the Act which dealt with the recoveries of money paid out by the municipality for relief or maintenance of hospitalization of their residents. There is an amendment to the

section of the Act which exempted certain properties from the imposition of municipal taxes, particularly to make it clear in the case of buildings used for the housing of the aged and infirm. One

section in which the Member for Lakeside will be interested, is the

section which deals with the payment of grants in lieu of taxes on lands taken by the province for special projects of the nature of water diversions or reservoirs. This is the matter which was discussed

1624 April 7, 196 6 (�. SMELUE cont'd) ... during the estimates of the Minister of Agriculture and which will allow the payment of grants in lieu of taxes on those properties for a period not exceeding three years.

The Honourable Member for Lakeside has indicated that he felt this should be in per petuity, but I think it's well established that for a certain works which the government under takes that they do not in fact pay taxes on the works that they provide which give a benefit to the community, and works of this nature are providing a benefit to the community in _the same way that highways and other pubFc works undertaken by senior government do.

On the other hand, it must be recogil.ized that when these properties are taken out of taxation by expropria tion of property, that in many cases hardship is imposed upon the municipality, and one of the municipalities in the area represented by the Honourable Member for Lakeside, indicated quite clearly to us what their problem was in one year, when by government action their taxable assessment had been substantially reduced.

After the budgets of the municipalities and the school board had been finalized, the municipality in that case was unable to collect taxes, but they were still forced to pay to the school districts the amounts which were levied against those properties before the expropriation took place. This

section will alleviate that problem and will also provide an additional two years in which the municipality will receive full taxes on all of the property expropriated for this purpose, and they will have plenty of notice in advance of the date on which -- the assessment on which they will receive grants in lieu of taxes, will cease. There is another amendment which provides a slight change in the method of appeal from assessment where the question is a question of law.

In the past the appellant has been required to take his appeal from the Court of Revision to the Municipal Board, and where it was a ques tion of law the Municipal Board then directed the appellant to make his appeal to the Court of Queen's Bench by stated case. This amendment will require the appellant in the first instance to make his appeal from the Court of Revision to the Court of Queen's Bench on points of law. There will still be the appeal in the ordinary way to the Municipal Board on a question of quantum.

A further amendment allows for the service of notice of tax sale proceedings where the land value is less than $2, 000 by registered mail. In the past the limit was $1, 000 and this limit has not been changed for many years. Many municipalities complain, however, that they have many properties where adequate notice can be served by registered mail and where the values of the properties are small, and it's not felt that it is necessary to provide personal service in these cases.

I think, Madam Speaker, that these are the main matters of principle that are dealt with in the bill, and it might be of some advantage to the House if we dealt with any matters that members wish to raise rather than me try to deal with each individual amendment. MR. SAUL CHERNIACK, Q. C. (St. John's): Madam Speaker, there are a number of wo rthwhile amendments here which of course, as the Minister indicates, will require study. There are two points that I'd like to raise on which I'd like to get clarification from the Minister.

The first is the proposed amendment that a joint tenancy, on the death of one of the joint tenants the lien shall pass on and remain on the property, and I question this approach or the principle involved because I think it is well known that on a joint tenancy, on the death of the joint owner his interest lapses completely and does not carry forward at all. Now, if the principle here is right then the whole principle of ownership and joint tenancy should be re-examined and changed.

If the municipality asserts a iight to carry forward its interest on the death of a debtor, then why shouldn't judgments against the debtor carry forward?

Now I am under the impression that when a husband and wife are joint tenants the lien is put against both of them so that on the death of one of them the lien still stands on the title against the other, but if the debt is owing only by one joint tenant, then, as I understand the entire principle of law of the ownership of joint tenancy, the interest ar equity of the deceased has lapsed and there is no further lien on it, and I would like the Minister to amplify whether I am correct in stating that he is, by this· amendment, challenging the whole concept of owner ship by joint tenancies, Now, another

section that appears on the last page seems to me to put municipalities in a position of being grantors, of giving grants; I don't know the powers of the municipality to give grants, but this gives unlimited power to give substantial grants by the sale for a nominal amount of land to any person to be used for a purpose deemed by the Council to be beneficial to the residents. I think this is a very dangerous section.· I think it puts municipalities, makes them subject to tremendous pressures, and I think that it ought not to be allowed without any reference of some type to some other body, unless it is clearly understood that it is a grant,

(MR.,CHE�N.lACK;coilt'd) . . , arid if C9uncil has the ·power to giv� Tand :;dvay because' iti its· r· discretion'itd �ems it advisable,. then I'd like to know to whal extent this type of power g6es beyond the: proVisions in the Municipal Act normally provided' for municip ill ities to make grants " to organizatioiis;. ; �ut this iSn't even an. organization; this is ·a person; and as I see.it; a ' municipality; may thilik that 'it's a. good idea to have a horse-raci ng track or to· have a super m:arket in some locati on or another, arid the municipality owning the land could then give it for $L 00 for that purpose because the Council deems it be to•beneficial to the •r'esidents. · Now lthink,this .is ·a. very broad power and I'd like the Minister to indicate whether he agrees·with··me:that this power .is uiilimited in connection with 'land owned by the m\.micipaiity, -.and' whether' he agrees with me•that this permits the giving of' so:rnethiiig practically for free . to a.person: - not necessarUy to an institution .or a body such as we might recognize, bti.t to ·any person.· �d I think it's very. dangerous, and I would like the ·Minister to 'justify it or clarify it.so. tnat.we should:understand·exactly what is being proposed in .this amendment.

MR. LEONARD A; BARKMAN (Carillon): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honollrable Member of La Verendrye, that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a· voice vote declared the motion car- ried. HON. STEWART E. McLEA N, Q. C. (Attorney-General) (Dauphin) presented Bill No. 82,

An Act to establish Procedures for the Acquisition of Land by Expropr1ation and for the Dete1:mination of Compensation for Land Expropriated and !,.and Injuriously •.affected by the Maintenance, Operation ·or Use of Works Constructed, Maintained or Used under Statutory Powers, for second reading; MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR.

McLEAN: Madam Speaker, from time to time in the House we have discussed the subject of expropriation and some of the problems attendant on the procedures respecting expropriation, and I believe· the opinion has been expressed that our law with respect to ex-: propriation ought to be up-'-dated and perhaps changed in some respects, and especially conso� lidated so that it would be. readily available and the procedures would be' as uhifor iii as possible insofar as various expropriating authorities are concerned. :The bill before the House, Bill No; 82, represents an attempt to do some of these things.

It is a new bill dealing with the · s.t:bject of expropl'iation and to be called The Expropriation Act.' . I should .explain that the general task in this connection was referred by myself to the Law Reform Committee; a committee that is established under the Attorney-General's Act by Order-in-Co uncil, and the Law Reform Committee in turn establi13hed a sub-'committee of' lawyers, some .of whom were. members of the Law Reform Committee itself, others who very kindly undertook to serve on the sub-committee and to work on this problem.

As a result of this approach, the bill which is before the members now is the result of the work in the first instance of the sub-committee, and then the work of the Law Reform Committee, because it came by way of a report to the Law Reform Committee and received consideration there, and now is before the Legislature. I may tell the members that it received very long and detailed and anxious and vigourous conSideration and discussion in both the sub-committee and in the Law Reform Committee.

While I was not present at any of the meetings of the sub-committee, I did spend a great deal of time with the Law Reform Conmittee i n its considerations of the report that came before them, and a number of changes, that is, the bill in the form in which we have- it now, reflects a number of changes made in the suggestions of the sub-committee as it came to the;m and as it now appears in the bill. I would :like to take this opportunity of expressing my own appreciation, and I am certain the appreciation of all of us, to those who gave a great deal of time in this important consider ation.

I would mention that use was made by the sub-committee and the Law Reform Committee of the report of the Royal Commission in British Columbia which studied for a period of over three years the subject of expropriation , and was the commission in which the commissioner · was the Honourable J; B. Kline, and this is an excellent study. Some of the recommendations in the British Columbia Royal Commission report found themselves reflected in the bill which we presently have before us.

The purpose of the bill is to consolidate, Simplify and codify the law in Manitoba as it relates to the general subject of expropriation, and as I indicated the oilier day when we were discuSsing it in committee stage, the bill would apply to all expropria tions insofar as the Province of Manitoba has legislative 'jurisdiction to deal with the topic of expropriation,. and perhaps I might just read, from the bill itself, the wording of the bill which

1626 April 7, 1966 (MR. McLEAN cont'd) ••. provides that "notwithstanding any Act of the Legislature, " the bill which is presently before us, "the Act applies wherever an authority .•... " - and I'll be discus sing in a moment what is meant by the term "authority" - wherever an authority expropriates or injuriously affects land in the exercise of its legal powers, " and it is also provided that the Crown is bound by the Act. And so I may say briefly that the bill before us applies to all expropriations, where expropriations are authorized by any Act of the Legislature of Manitoba, and also it applies to expropriations by the Crown itself. There are a large number of

definitions of course in the bill, but some

definitions are of particular importance. I have mentioned the matter of authority which is defined by the bill as "any person, including the Crown, in the right of Manitoba, who under

an Act of the Legislature has power to acquire land by expropriation or without the consent of the owner. " And it will be recognized that that would apply, for example, to a municipal corporation, to a school corpora tion, a Qrown agency, or Crown commission, the Manitoba Hydro Board, the Manitoba Telephone Commission, and any authority - any agency or arm of government, or branch of government - which by reason of its own statutory authority or statutory authority that is conferred, has the right to expropriate land without the consent of the owner of it. "Authorizing Act " is defined by the bill also, is

an Act, of. course, of this Legislature, in which the authority is granted power to acquire land by expropriation. And again, that of course is a companion matter to the subject of the definition of "authority". "Crown Agency" is defined as the Manitoba Hydro Electric Board, the Manitoba Telephone System, the Manitoba Hospital Commission and the Manitoba Water Supply Board.

"Highway" is defined at some lengths, and I perhaps could just briefly say that "highway" as it is defined in the bill includes anything that one would normally consider to be within that ge neral category in our modern system of highways and means by which people travel from one place to another. "Works" is also defined at even greater length, and again I think all the words are there to include anything which might be considered to be a public work, and on which either the government itself or a public body would extend any monies for public purposes.

I would direct members' attention to the definition of "mines and minerals", or rather to a definition relating to mines and minerals, because of the fact that it is provided that the term "mines and minerals" does not include sand and gravel, and if the honourable members wanted to get into a real debate and discussion, they might like some time to discuss this subject of sand and gravel in its relationship to mines and minerals.

In any event, the point that I wish pa rticularly to draw to the attention of the members is the fact that when, in the bill whi�h is before us, the expression "mines and minerals" is used it does not include sand and gravel, and that if one were 'desirous of expropriating sand and gravel it would be necessary to specific ally say so by means of the procedure to which I will refer to in just a moment.

Because there are so many matters set out in the bill and perhaps for another reason that I will also mention in just a moment, I don't want to go through step by step all of the procedures that are set out in the Act because it would take much too long and it would require a very detailed consideration.

I would just say that the general procedure that is outlined by the bill is that expropriation proceedings by any authority as defined by the bill itself begin by register ing a declaration of expropriation in the Land Titles Office, indicating the land that it is desired to expropriate and with the necessary particulars as required by the Act, and that service of that declaration of course must be made upon each of the registered owners who will be affected by the proposed expropriation within 90 days.

There are some other features in the bill with respect to extension of time where that seems advisable and ..•• but basically, within 90 days of the filing of the declaration of the notice of expropriation in the Land Titles Office. It is provided that the authority shall pay to the owner what is referred to or called "due compensa tion" and again, that interesting topic of discussion, the real and full meaning of the expression "due compensation" for the land and for any injurious effects to other land in the parcel and for disturbance caused by the expropriation.

And I indicate that only to simply point out that the bill places requirement on the authority to pay what is referred to as due compensation, and of course much of the Act is devoted to outlining how that due compensation shall be determined. Many of the provisions in the bill are designed to assist in the settlement or agreement as between the authority and the owner as to the price to be paid, because we recognize that in most instances it is to the public advantage if the parties concerned can agree upon the price to be paid.

There's we hope, a nice balance of checks to ensure that the position of both the. authority and the owner or owners is protected. Whether the advantage lies with one or the

162'7 (MR. McLJ'JA � ;eont'd);:. other',' of course; is some'tirties a matter of opirti'on an:d agaili so'�e- times is a ina!tter of debat8', 13ut'I just ·say that what is attempted J.npri'nciple in the bill, is to provide the necessary 'prbtecti6n'fo all' parties whii� at the same time creating a framework' withi'n *llieh';it is 'always hoped that thil parties concertii3d will arrive ata' ;settlEnrtent as to' th6 amotint· to' be' piiid by the ituthority; the expropriating authority, to the owner of the land.

If ' Uiat' shoW:a ;ri.ot transpire, hcrwev'ef, provision is made 'for thee stahlishnient 'of the 'Lahd co 'rri pensation Board -'- a.riO'we were disctissirigthis briefly �hen afthe reSolilt1on sta:ge �whose ' . fhllction it \Vm be'to dete'rmine ;the due compensation to be paid by the atithdrityto the owit�r� I just avern:\beflyto'the fact tliat th6 Land Compensation: Board would a1so ha ye some other respoiisibilitiE!s M a more iliinor nature dealing with various points of pr�dedur.e asthe. matter· might' proceed along;' for example, appl:icatioris for extensfon of time and related matters of that general nature woUld he · decided by the Land Compensation Board, but primaril y: the Land Compensation' Board as propo'sed. by the bill would have the duty of determining in the final analysis, if agreement has n6tbeen macte between the parties, t.he responsibility of determining the compensation to be paid; ·arid the jurisdic'tion of the Board as it is set out in the bill is to hear and determine' all applications made, proceedings instituted, and matters referred to or brought before iturtder the Act, or any other Act cif the Legislature, and for SI:I.Ch purposes to make such ordeni, rUles ahd 'regulations and give such directions, issue such certificates, and otherwise do and perform all such acts, matters, deeds and things as may be necessary ot incidental to the exercise of the powers conferred upon th� board under such Act.

Included in . this responsibility is that Of making an award with respect to. compensation pa,yable by an authority for �xptopriation of land or an injurious effect on rand that is concerned fu proceed- ings that are taken under this Act, · . .

Members will recognize that this Land Compensation Board woUld stand in place instead of the Court, 1the Judge' of the Court; because those matters under present law how go to· a Judge of the Court, and it is proposed to substitute for the court this Land Compensation Board. it would -I think I used the expression the other day in the Committee that it woUld be a ql.l.asi court in the sense that it would have the same functions is a court, and it would in effect become a sort of spe9ia:l court dealiD.g with land expropriation matters.

I thilik the· argument to be made iri favour of this procedure is that now, since we have so many expropriations, so' many occasions when authorities are taking land for-one purpose or another, thit the argument can well be made , that We hive need of those who wblild become specialists in this field and who would acqtiiie a special body of knowledge to deal with problems of this nature.

I did indicate, however, that I recognized that there was an�ther side to this, and there are those who \'/Oti.ld argue that rt is best to leave this function to the court where it is at the present time, and I simply point out the differing points of view. I believe that both points of view are well held .and certainly stout- ly defended, but the balance of our judgment woUld tend to be that the Lruid Compensation Board is a better arrangement.

I woUld want, however, the House to know that this decision was not arrived at easily and without great consideration both in the sub-committee and in'th e Law Reform Committee and by some of the rest of us who had occasion to finally prepare and approve and bring 'forward the legislation. · 1 would point out that there iS a right of appeal from a decision of the Board which is provided in the bill. It is an appeal to the Court of Appeal and in that sense it preserves what is the present situation, namely, the right of appeal that exists from the court.

Madam Speaker, when we were discussing this bill in the Law Reform Committee, it was the feeling of the Law Reform Committee, and as a matter of fact is a firm recommendat ion of that Committee to me, that more time could well be spent on the consideration of a bill of this nature, arid they expressed the wish that some means woUld be devised whereby the bill would not receive hnal approval at this Session of the Legislature but might be put in such a way that it couid be· discuss ed; perhaps brought out into the public view more than was the case with the· Law Reform Committee itself, and I woUld have to say that with that opinion I agree, having as l say sat! in on·.many h�urs of discusSio n and heard many points of view e:.tpressed.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, it is my view, and I direct members' attention to the fact that we ate'proposing to refer this bill to the Committ ee on Statutory Regulations and Orders with a view that the bill remain in the Committee for consideration by such groups of people who may wish to do so as well as members of the Committee itself, between this Session and tlie next Ses'sion of the Legislature, in order that it would have that further consideration that woUld seem: to be helpful.

If there are those among the members who are anxious to proceed forthwith immediately, they will be disappointed a:t that suggestion, I'm sure, but I wanted it

1628 April 7, 1966 (MR. McLEAN cont'd) •.• to be clear that we are proposing that this bill should go to the Committee on Statutory Regulations and Orders, and that it ought not necess arily to be reported back to this Sess ion of the Legislature.

May I point out, however, or may I say also in that same connection, that if this procedure is adopted, if it's the will of the House that this bill rece ive second reading at this stage and is referred to the Committee on statutory Regulations and Orders, it of course must come back to the House at some later time as a bill and follow the regular steps of introduction, first and second re ading, and of course be referred presu mably to the Law Amendments Committee for considera tion; in other words that there would be the very fullest opportunity for the members of the Legislature to consider this matter further .when the bill came back from the Committee on Statutory Regulations and Orders.

I would hope that the members wouid not think that this is suggested for any reason of delay, but I would want it to be quite clear, as I say, that this procedure, not nece ssa rily this particular procedure because I don't know that the membe rs of the Law Reform Committee particularly were concerned about the proce dure insofar as the Legislature was concerned, but that the idea of holding the bill for this lengthier considera tion was suggested and recommend ed by the Law Reform Comm ittee - and I don't want to hide behind them, I agree with their recommendation because I'm quite well aware of the differences of opinion that are held among those who have given some study to this topic matter, and I believe that it is in the public interest that it be handled in this way.

Madam Speaker, perhaps with that introduction or that comment, I may -- it is unneces sary at this stage to say anything further other that to recommend the bill to the House on this occasion, and subject to what I have said with respect to the procedure that I believe ought to be followed for its further consideration. MR. HRYHORCZUK : Madam Speaker, I just want to say a few words about this very unusual procedure.

It's not as unusual as it was during the previous sessi ons because this is the second time the honourable minister has brought in a bill which according to him received - the contents of which rather, received very vigorous study by very competent bodies . He introduces the bill, we have second reading on it, we take up a great deal of the time of the House to acquaint the members with the contents of these bills, and then we are told, Madam Speaker, that the bill will not be put through the usual procedure of going to Law Amendments, rec eiving third reading and becoming the law of the province .

It is going to go to the Commi ttee on Statutory Regulations and Orders where they will go through the bill once again, then it'll come back to the House, if it ever does, and it will be in troduced, we'll again have a second reading on it and maybe that time it'll be referred to Law Amendments or ma ybe it'll go back to some other committee for study. Well, Madam Speaker, within the last few days we have received about 30 different bills and it just makes it impossible for us here in the Opposition to give the attention that a lot of this legislation deserves.

Some of these bills are very important, and I think we could do well by considering those bills only that we intend to deal with at this sess ion, Instead of bringing in bills as large as this, we've spent about half an hour on this bill, without the government having any intention at all of putting it through in this sess ion as law. Why the waste of time and effort in having the Queen 's Printer print that bill, of going through all that procedure, holding up, holding up other bills in the proce ss which the honourable minister and his colleagues hope to pass this year.

We're getting near the end of the ses sion. I really don't understand what is behind the honourable minister's thinking. I do know, I do know that there 's an election in the offing and it almost appears to me, Madam Speaker, that the only reason that this bill, which is an important bill - it cove rs the ground that we've wanted cove red for the last se veral sessi ons; I believe it covers it well.

The former bill that was treated in the sa me way was an important piece of legislation, probably long overdue, and I think the honourable ministe r knows that a ce rtain segment of the society of the Province of Manitoba have been waiting for this legislation, and just because this happens to be an election year, surely Madam Speaker there is some place where we'v e got to cut off political expediency and do the busine ss of the people of this province.

We'v e been in here now for nine weeks and the honourable minister told the people of the Province of Manitoba quite a number of weeks ago - I wish I'd of kept track of when he did make the announcement that there were 120 bills coming before the legislature. He knew then how many bills, he must have known what the bills were going to be and he knew the importance of them, and they haven't been presen ted to us in my humble opinion, Madam Speaker, in the order of their importance, because some of the most important bills have been laid before us within

April 7, 1966 1629 (MR. HRYHORCZUK cont'd) ... the last couple of days; and I want to repea t that its impossi ble for the opposition to give them the attention that they deserve . And then when you get legislation that is first spoken on in this House by way of a reso lution, then it is introduced, brought in for second reading, we're supposed to debate it- for what purpose ?

I ask the honourable minister what purpose is being served when you're going to refer that bill, or those bills now - it's not a bill any more, there 's two of them now, probably more by the time we get through - are going to be referred to another committee who's going to go through the same procedure that two committees have already gone through, a sub-committee of the Law Reform Committee and the Law Reform Committee, with the assi stance of the Minister, who gave it all the vigorous thought that they could, I think that the House deserves an explanation. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. John's.

MR.

CHERNIACK: Madam Speaker, I've not yet had an opportunity to commence my survey of the number of committees that are going to be sitting in between sessi ons, if indeed they sit at all, but I would guess that there's a fair number ranging from farm machine ry to - I'm guess ing now - but ombudsman. and about professional licensing and gasoline - is there ? and it seems to me that it's going to be pretty busy between ses sions. (Interjection) Oh, I'm told there may also be an election which may interfere with the holding of the committees or possi bly the election can be set aside for the busine ss of the House.

I will surprise the Minister by saying that although I spoke I think rather vehemently on the que stion of postponing the Corrections Bill, I do not feel quite as vehement about this one because I see it as a some what different proposal. For one thing I don't believe that the urgency is as great - and I'm compa ring it with the rema rks I made on the Corrections Bill. Secondly, this is in effect set ting up a new court in effect and I think does require a good deal of study.

However, I'm certainly not prepared to just agree to say that yes, by all me ans let's put it off for a rainy day, because I think we have work to do and we ought to be doing it. Dealing with the bill itself there are a number of minor points which I don't want to deal with now and take up the time of the Ho use. I hope that if a committee does get around to sitting on it, I will have an opportunity to comment at . • . . (Interjection) .. .

Well now, the question was raised as to nature of these appointments and it's a coincidence that I was just coming to that point; not ag to who would be appointed but as to the powers - not the powers so much as the sec urity of tenure of the people appointed. To whom will they be re sponsible, will there ·be a minister who will be able to give instructions - I don't mean as to any particular matter, but will they be subject to pressures from anybody? That's putting it bluntly.

There will be work involved for this Land Compens ation Board which will be dealing as between the government and individual people, and I think it's important that there shouldn't be the slightest doubt as to the independance of such a board. That's why it occurred to me to ask, and comparing it to a court, to ask the nature of the appointment that would be made .

Now, there 's nothing in the Act that indicates the life of appointments which mak es me think that this may be one that would be subject to termination in some way, and I think we ought to have some understanding and I think that it ought to be in the Act so that the people appointed will, like a court, feel that they are completely independent. This is the one important is sue that I want to raise at this stage. Other matters I would be prepared to deal with in committee - if I ever happen to be able to form part of a committee which will be dealing with this. MR. MARK G.

SMERC HANSKI (Burrows): Madam Speaker, the one major matter that comes up in this Bill and which the honourable minister mentions, and that's particularly sand and gravel. Now surely there should have been some cons ideration given in this bill because this is the most common condition that will arise in matters of expropriation, and I think that certain amount of cons ideration should be given to properly define gravel and sand. It is not that impossi ble and it is not that difficult to define, and certainly in most of your expropriations invariably there's some land that will be involving gravel and sand.

Now these two items can be explained, they can be defined, they can be surveyed and assessed properly like any other mineral. As a matter of fact the closer they are to the surface the more readily and the more accurately they can be desc ribed.

Now I do know that in terms of legal terminology that probably there is a certain amount of difficulty in defining gravel and sand, but from the prac tical approach of these two materials there is absolutely no difficulty, and this bill if it deals with expropriation, gravel and sand are going to form a major part of the difficulty that will arise under this bill; and therefore there should be some definite effort made with the express

1630 April 7, 1966 (MR. SMERCHANSKI cont'd), . . purpose of defining precisely what is me"ant by gravel and sand so.thatwben this matter does come up it can be resolved by the bill that is set up to try and resolve these matters, • I think that a great deal of effort and time should be spent to properly define gravel and sand because this is going to be a most normal type of difficulty" that will be encountered by this Act. . . • • • . • . . . continued on next page

1631 MR.

FROESE: Madam Speaker, I personally have no objection of: having the bill ·go to<· committee:,andtholding it over. ·I realize fully well"what the Horrourabte Member fo� Ethelbert PlainS Said;;. ·thaHtseemed•rather•unnecessary to have it introduced now ar:id'have·the same thing done. over iagain .at the· following .seSsion or. at the next session. •· ; However{these ' bi:Us al'e being mstributed 'and all members will have a cb:ance to look at them, not only the •menibers .of. the particular committee that the • bill is referred to ·but all· members will have a chance to evaluate the bill and bring up•any ·of its weaknesses and so on, I really•.haven't·given the bill any study· aa·such. 1 tiaturallyi would like to discuss it with some people thakLhave·contact with and·therefore would like to bring up some poin:ts when we deal with itin committee,.

So this •is alLl have to say at the present time. ' MR; ·: CAMP,BELL: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by:the Honourable' the Member for · Ethelbert. ·Plains, that the· debate :be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion:.· carried •. : :MR .. Mc.LEAN:presented Bill No. 83,

an Act to amend The Liquor Control Act, for · second reading .. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. ··MR.· Me LEAN: Madam Speaker, members will be glad to know that I'm not going to propose to send this Bill to the Regulations and Orders Committee to be held for a year. The bill has a number of what might be regarded as I suppose. technical matters. Two items are perhaps of more particular interest than the others, making sm:ri.e small departure from the present provisions of The Liquor Act, I would just like to indicate the prinCiples that are involved in the provisions of the bill.

There is a provision that will provide that the Com' niission, The Liquor Control Commission, in the public interest may close ariy licenced premises. This ·tx>wer is given or implied with respect to most licen.ced premises in other sections of the Act. There is a provision for a magistrate to direct the Commission to make a prohibition order against the reSidence of a person convicted of an offence, that calls for a mandatory prohibition against the place from which the offence took place.

Sometimes these offences are in a person's c'at or in a friend's house and the provision would allow the magis trate to direct that the prohibition' order should be made against the residence of the person' who is alleged to arid who has been convicted of breaking the law. It is felt that this decision is better made at the trial by the magistrate, than subsequently by the Commission itself who are required to act on the advice of law enforcement officers.

As a corollary to that there is a provision that would enable the magistrate to advise the Commission not to make a prohibiqon order that is .otherwise mandatory, incircumstances where the magistrate feels that the man.:. datory order ·ought to be waived; as for example the illegal sale of liquor having taken place· from a friend's residence Without the friend's knowledge that that was being done.

We have had cases of that occurring and where under the present law it is mandatory the friend's place be made a prohibited place even though he may not have been aware of the illegal activity on the part of the accused person. · · There is a provision which is a departure, although it has already been mentioned in the House, whicll would enable liquor to be sold after the polls close on Provincial Election days, and similarly on: days of voting on local sale by-laws.

This would me'an that any liqu�r store that could be open after the close of polls on an election day, could be open for the balance of the regular hours ofthat store, and of course 'would allow licenced premises that would legally be open to be open after the close of polls� and of course until their normal closing hour. This is a: departure fro:tn the present arrangements, and members will know that a companion provision is in: The Election Act; the amendments which are presently being considered by . · · Law Amendments Cominittee which deals with this· same subject matter.

I just pause to mention here that with respect to Federal Elections, The Federal Election' Act prohibits the sale of liquor for the whole of the day of the Federal Election, and neither · this legislation nor the legislation which is being considered under our Manitoba Licen ce Act would·have any bearing on that situation. . The provisions in the Act relating to the charges to be made by purchasers of liquor in which they request that lt be sent by express or mail, will be niade by regulation of the · Commission. I just mention that

whereas at one time a lot of liquor was purchased through the mail and forwarded through the mail, there is relatively little of that done anymore and there· is a provisiorl si:riiply which would allow tlie Commission to make the regulations with respect to t� e ·charges to be made for that service where it is asked for.

,--------- ---- 1632 April 7, 1966 __ _ (MR. McLEAN, cont1d) .... There is a provision respecting the Orders-in-Council that are required in the case of licenses in Unorganized Territory. The Order-in-Council is required for the initial licence, but not annually for the issue of the licence because licenqes, as .members will know .are reissued annually, or at least they are considered annually and presumably reissued, and this would avoid the necessity of having an Order-in-council each year as. the lice.Ii.ce is renewed, if it is renewed, by the Commission.

There is a requirement put in the bill that would require that. the main persons of a corporation seeking or holding a liquor Licence must be of good reputation and character. This qt,�alification is in the Act with respect to individual people seeking licen ces, but now with the current trend toward incorporation of companies it is felt that the same qualifications should apply to what are referred to as the main persons in the corporation. The same general principle is extended in connection with the disqualified from holding licences.

There are some provisions in the bill respecting where beer should be stored in licen.ced premises, and the proposal is to allow the Commission to make regulations related to that matter. There is a provision which removes what is considered to be an unintended contra diction in regard to minors being allowed in certain licen ced premises when such premises are authorized to be used for other purposes, on Sunday, or sometime other than when those premises are in use for their norma! purpose.

I believe there was one instance --well I know there was one instance because it was brought to my personal attention --of a group holding a church service in what was normally a licenced premises, a church service held on Sunday and of course there was no liquor, and it was --someone felt that minors who would of course not be allowed in those premises during time when liquor could be sold or served, that they could not attend the church service. This is a small matter, it is hoped to correct the situation by the provisions here.

At the present time there is in The Liquor Act a limit on the number of sacram ental wine vendor licences that may be issued. As a matter of fact there are two at the present time - I'm sorry, there are five at the present time, there's a limit of five --it is proposed to remove that limit. We are aware of the fact that there are two application presently before the Liquor Commission which cannot be accommodated because of the limitation placed by the Act to five. The proposal is simply to remove the limit. I rather expect that there won't be too many people wanting licences for selling sacramental wine.

And finally, and this again is perhaps a fairly important change, a change that would allow airlines, aircraft, or an aircraft carrier, air carrier, to apply for a dining room licence. The proposal here is parallel exactly with the present existing legislation as it applies to railways. This would require of course an application in the regular way to be considered by the Liquor Licencing Board, and the Liquor Commission, and it would apply to specified flights, and is in respect of dining room licences only.

As I say it's exactly parallel to the present existing legislation as it applies to railway passenger trains. Madam Speaker, I recommend this Bill to the Hollse and hope that it will be disposed of at this Session. MR. CAMPBELL: Madam Speaker, may I ask the Honourable Minister a question? Is the Minister aware of how many provinces now grant that last request of the air carriers? MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I have one dealing with the same matter. It's a question rather than an observation of the Act.

If I recall correctly the present Act dealing with travel by train, this only applies, that is the granting of a liquor licence for the train only applies to those lines which travel within the province but go outside of the province as well. A line, as I understand it, a railroad line operating strictly within the province itself --say for instance, a local line between here and Brandon --I don't think it's permissive at the present time for that particular line to serve liquor to the travellers. If I'm correct in that, will that same apply insofar as air travel is concerned? MR.

McLEAN: Madam Speaker, if I answer the questions I assume I am closing the debate. MR. HRYHOR CZUK: No, Madam Speaker, these were questions. These were not- both members said they directed questions to you. Answering the questions isn't going to close the debate. · MADAM SPEAKER: Any further questions from any member? MR. CAMPBELL: Madam Speaker, this I think should be on a point of Order because the very obvious reason I think of why we have allowed questions in the past, and we have allowed

April 7, 1966 · 163,3 (MR. CAMPBELL, cont'd) •... them at this Session, Madam Speaker , is that sometimes it's a timesaver as far as debate is . concerned because if the Minister is allowed to answer questions then sometimes he makes it unnecessary for somebody to speak. I think it's in the interest of not only procedure, which I believe to be right, but in the interest ·of the economy of tiine I think ms a good procedure and I don't think it's ever been abused in the House iti this way.

Now I purposely made mine a question and I would suggest that we continue the practice of the past of allowing the Minister to answer questions. MR. EV ANS: .•.. point of Order being discussed, it has not been my experience as the universal experience of the past that one can answer questions up and down 'like in· a Co:m:mittee. This is:. a formal debate. Many tiines I recall the Speaker ruling that if the honourable m:ember, the person closing t�e debate answered the question he's closing the debate. If however, there is a short question which will help things n,ow I'm sure we· would give consent to �swering it.

MR. CAMPBELL: On a point of Order, Madam Speaker, would you consult your own · records at you:r own convenience as to what has happened· this year because la m' sure that it has been dealt with already this year. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the Honourable the Attorney-General wishto answer the questions? If p.ot he will be closing the debate. MR. McLEAN: Madam Speaker, I am in your hands; I have no objec tion to answering the two questidns that have been asked. I only just didn't want to close off further debate on this bill.

I am not aware of the number of provinces that grant the air carriers. , I know tha.t it is in effect in Ontario. Applications or requests .have been made to both .Alberta and Saskatchewan and British Columbia. I do not know what action is being taken in either Saskatchewan or Alberta. I did read in the press where the Attorney-General of British Columbia said that he thought that this was a federal matter and ought to be dealt with by the federal parliament.

The licence that can be granted under present legislation to railway trains, apply to both trains operateli within the province as well as those that cross provincial boundary lines. And the same would be true of. airlines. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR. GUTTORMSON: Madam Speaker, I move seconded by the Member for Ethelbert the debate be �journed. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. STEINKOPF presented Bill No. 84

an Act to amend the Consumer Credit Act for second reading. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion,. MR. STEINKOPF: Madam Speaker, this is an amendment that provides that where the . vendor uses the telephone, the telegram or correspondence in obtaining the sale that contract will be subject to the effect of the Consumer Credit Act,just. as if he was going from door to door. MADAM SPEAKER: All those in favour .... MR. PETERS: Does this mean that a person getting a contract through the telephone he has three days or four days to rescind it? MR.

STEINKOPF: Actually he has two days -- it's the same effect as the door to door salesman. MAD� SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. STEINKOPF presented Bill No. 85,

an Act to amend the Securities Act for second reading. MADAM SPEAKER: presented the motion. MR. STEINKOPF: Madam Speaker, in the field of securities as in the field of consumer credit and company law and all that, there is a new look being taken at all secur ity legislation right across panada and it is the hope that sooner or later the federal government will step in and provide fpr some uniform legislation in the matter of the sale and the promotion of securities of all types.

Our Act has not been commended in substance for many many years and we have now in the last year been working on a complete revision of the Security Act and didn't have it' ready for this Session, but we did ha.ve some amendments ready that we thought were iinport�t enough to have them brought before the House at this tiine. Some of the main points in the Bill provide that companies as well as individuals in the operation of this Act will be treated in the same ma-:mer as an individual. Specifically, it

1634 April 7, �9titi (MR. STEINKOPF cont1d.) provides that a mineral interest broker may be his com pany as well as -an individual's. The Act now provides for perso ns only from trading in:securities and does not prohibit companies. Recently there was a decision in the Manitoba Court of Appeal handed down by Justice Freedman and he stated that an .amendment of the Statute. to close this obvious gap seems desi rable right in the judgment. We concur with His Lordship and this amendment is before you.

There is exem ption now for isolated trades not extending to persons whose usual business is. trading.,in. sec urities and we plan to change that with this Act and this is consis tent with the provisions of the Ontario and other uniform acts of other provinces. There is nece ssi ty for clarifying .a.section, .the mea ning of which is pretty obscure and pretty technical, but the in tent is that banks and loan companies and trust companies and insurance companies should be able to purchase sec urities whether those sec urities are otherwise qualified for trading in Manitoba or not.

The purpose behind this is of course that banks and trust companies and the like do not need the protection of

an Act of this type, they seem to be old enough to look after themselves, they 're sophisticated investors, but there 's a real danger that some of these in stitutions might be marketing securities on behalf of a client that otherwise wouldn •t be ma rketable unless they were registered with our Securities Department. So there is a

section now being provided that the combined effect of which would be to clarify the

section and to prevent banks and trust companies from selling or dealing with securities that would otherwise have to be registered or in cases of primary distribution wouldn •t be permitted to be handled by the banks or anyone. There are a number of clauses that will have to be amended in order to permit the Act to be effective against companies as well as to persons.

It has another important clause that has to do with the method that salesmen are us ing in selling investment contracts which they now can do on a door-to-door basis, or can call at a residence, but they can •t do it for the sale of mutual funds and many of the companies who are in the business of selling investment contracts are also in the business of selling mutual funds.

It seem s logical that first of all that these two types of sales - the contract and the mutual fund sale should be combined and a simpl e requirem ent provided now that before a sale can be made on this formerly door-to door basis, that a prior appointment be made by the intended purchaser with the vendor. Those two things are in the same se ction and they are probably the only major change in the Act. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question'? MR. SMERCHANSKI : Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for La Vere ndrye, the debate be adjourned.

MADAM SPEAKER presen ted the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MR. HUTTON pres ented Bill No. 89,

an Act to Am end the Credit Unions Act, for se cond reading. ' MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. HUTTON: Speaking in terms of principle of the bill, there is an attempt being made here to tighten up the control and supervision of the Credit Unions. The Act provides for a tightening up at the local level within the Credit Union itself with the restoration of res ponsibilty to the Board of Directors and the provision for the appointment of the Supervisory Commi ttees by the Board of Directors.

At the present time both the Board of Directors and the Supervisory Commi ttee are elected by the members of the Credit Union and so you get some division of authority and a bit of a reluctance on the part of Board of Directors to iriterfere with a Corn rnittee which is elected by the membership. Well provision is being made here in the Act to restore the authority and responsi bility of the Board of Directors. If you note going through the Act some matters are defined - I1m going to use the term cheque instead of negotiable order as has been the case.

There 's a provision here which would allow a credit union to de posit up to 50 percent of its capital in a chartered bank or a central . credit union rather than 25 percent . This is particularly applicable to the Caisse Populaires who would like to have more than 25 percent of their capital with their central organization. On the bottom of the first page of the bill you have a reference to the Board of Directors a change in the authority from the Supervisory Commi ttee to the Board of Directors. Much of this is just a re-wording of the present Act.

There is a res triction with respect to what can be considered paid up capital and deposits. Where a memb er may have borrowed money to make a deposit -- the unpaid portion of the estate or endowed loan has to be deducted from the

April 7, 1966 1635 (MR. HUTTON cont'd. ) .. .. . calculations. There is a provision which will restrict borrowing where the 'director feels that the�e are too many loans in bad sh�pe being held by a Credit Union. It's a -little bit hard to deal with principles without getting into.the actual considera tion of these el�uses one by one.

For instance in respect to patronage divfdends where the Board of Directors has recomm ended a rebate of interest on loans, such rebate and interest on loans as may be appro �ed by res olution passed at the annual meeting, but no such rel:iate shall be approved if the i a:te of dividends paid on shares is less than tbe interest paid on deposit. Now there's a ch�nge also in respect to the right of the directors to appoint a treasurer and a ma nager under the prese nt reading of the bill. They must be the same person.

This provides that they can be' the same person or they may be two separate individuals' and it really accomm odates the la� ger Credit Unions. The matter of liquidity requirem ent is dealt with on Page 5 in

Section 13, and it requires that a soci ety shall ma intain cash or liquid reserve of not less than five percent of the total of the shares, the deposits and borrowings of a society, not including the unpaid. portion of an estate or endowment shares. Each society that permits negotiable orders, a withdrawal or cheques , must in addition to the reser ve required under the earlier

section maintain a cash or liquid reserve of not less than ten percent of deposits for the first one million dollars of deposits. Then in 57 (b), no society shall permit its members to use or issue cheques unless the supervisor has examined the affairs Cif the society and is satisfied that it meets certain require ments, certain qualifications .

Section 58 allows the Board of Directors to receive some remuneration for their services. It 1s lim ited to $30. 00 in any calendar month. In the past they have served their Credit Unions without any compensation, but when you consider the size of some of these operations it is not hard to imagine that they can be very dem anding in terms of time, etc. , on the part of people holding responsible positions in these organizations. 60 (

a) is pretty well the sam e. On the bottom of Page 7, 60 (

d) spells out in detail the res ponsibility of the supervisory comm ittee. It really doesn •t give it any more authority than it had before, but it clarifies this authority and these resp onsibilities. 62 (

a) says that except where the sec urity held for the loan consists of a charge against the shares and deposits of a member in a society which are sufficient to cover the loan, no loan society other than the Central Credit Union shall make a loan that is to be repayable on demand. 63 (

a) is a further supervisory -- provides additional supervision over loans in that it restricts a Credit Union in making comm ercial or business loans, and restricts it in this sense that no society shall make a commercial or business loan if the aggregate of the principal am ounts thereof unpaid exceeds two percent of the paid-up share capital of a society. There is a feeling amongst the Credit Union people themselves and certainly with the Co-operative and Credit Union Branch, that credit unions are not properly equipped to enter into some of these large comm ercial or business type loans.

I might say there 's an exception here. It doesn •t apply to farming, but farming can be a fairly big business too. Then we go on, and there are exceptions where the Credit Union, the Board of Directors and the members, meet certain qualifications. They can make business loans and if they en gage in this business it requires these loans to be fully secured by lien or charge on property, and it requires the credit union to be repres ented by a solicitor in certain of these negotiations. Now 69, or

Section 17 of this bill, 69 deals with the requirements for filing returns, and under the old section, or what I should refer to as existing legislation, the rules could only be altered by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-C ouncil and under this legislation the procedures are standardized. In

Section 74, there is only really a change in wording. There is no change in the intent or sense of the legislation from the past.

In 21, wherever a Credit Union has wound up its affairs in the past, the Minister got involved and then subsequently the matter is deal t with by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Co uncil, and. in order to cut down the amount of paper work and the papers coming and going, we recommend to you that the director can carry through the procedures until we come to the point where the Order-in-Co uncil is required, and then at that time the matter can be reviewed by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Co uncil, and I think it will cut down a little on the paper.

Probably governments are contributing a great deal to the dem and for pulp these days.

Apri� 7, 196(! (MR. HUT TON cont 'd. ) · Then you come to the sec tion of the bill which deals with a liquidator -- (Interjection) -- You wish you had his services now? You'd probably point him at me. We •ve got enough liquid around this spring. This sec tion dealing with a liquidator provides what we believe is a smoother and more dependable way of getting the affairs of local credit unions wound up .

Some times there may be just a few dollars that are left in the busines s, and it is very difficult sometimes to get members of the credit union to go to all the trouble that is involved in getting the affairs wound up, so this would provide the procedure and allow for the appointment of a person, say, from the Credit Union League and somebody from the Federation and somebody from the Caisse Populaires to do this work. Now the next important sec tion deals with the situation where some of the larger credit unions desire to hire their own auditors.

We have to maintain a competent personnel and an adequate supervisory service in the department. The average annual cost of this service is something in the neighborhood of $73, 000. The credit unions contribute about $37, 000 through the fees that are levied. In the case where adequate notice is given, this legislation provides that where adequate notice is given to the director that a credit union is going to carry out an independent audit of its books, we will reduce its fee for that year by 50 percent.

We don't give it back 10 0 perc ent because we still have to maintain that service, but we do acknowledge that it reduces the work load and ·some acknowledgment should be given. I think maybe I'd better sit down. MR. FROESE : Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Fisher, that debate be adjourned . MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. . . . . . continued on next page

April 7, 1966 1637 MR. HUTTON presen ted Bill No. 91,

an Act to amend The Department of Agriculture and Conser vation Act, for second re ading. MADAM SPEAKER pres ented the motion. MR. HUTTON: It doesn't take very long this time. I would advise them to read the ex planatory note in the ins ide ••• MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, while the explanatory notes may be brief and the Minister's comments may be brief, it does seem to me, however, as I read the se ction, that more considera tion should be given to the amendment, because as I read the bill it takes away the nece ssi ty of the department of making speci al grants to municipalitie s for tax loss due to acquisition of land for Water Control Works . If this is so, then I think this matter should be considered more seri ously, because as I read the se ction of the Act -- (Interjection) -- Pardon?

Well, I can't be here and if the Minister had explained it on seco nd reading maybe I wouldn't be up now, but if the Minister will briefly say that the municipalities will not be injured insofar as tax loss is concerned by this, then I'll take his word for it. But I wasn't here, and if I was a healthy, robust young man like the Honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs, then I would have been here and heard the explanation, but being a poor, frail human such as I am, I wasn't here.

But as I say, if the Minister will assure me that there is no revenue lost to the munici palities as a res ult of this and flood control programs, then I'm satisfied. MR. HUTTON: Yes, I should have mentioned this, asked the members to note that the Act comes into force on a day fixed by proclamation; and thflt is because we want to deal with two of the municipalities who are affected by these Water Control Works and who were better off under the formula that we originally negotiated with the munici palities than they would have been had we applied the new formula to them .

So we're dealing with the two -- we had a good deal under the old formula; we're dealing with them, then resci nding this legislation, and for the rest we'll deal with them under the provision of the Municipal Act. MADAM SP,EAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. STEINKOPF pres ented Bill No. 92,

an Act to amend The Civil Service Superannua tion Act, for second reading. MADAM SPEAKER presen ted the motion. MR. STEINKOPF : Madam Speaker, this bill is required because of the co-ordination of the Superannuation Fund with the Canada Pension Plan and the whole bill has to do with the amendments in order to ma ke this possi ble . MR. PAULL EY: Madam Speaker, I would like to say a word or two in connection with this bill, and I'm sorry it's late in the evening. I could of course have adjourned the motion but I thirik rather than do that I have a number of questions I would like to ask of the Minister.

The first question which I would direct to my honourable friend is, what consultation, if any, has taken place between the Em ployees Associa tion and the Government in respect of the changes in pension plans as a re sult of the New CPP ? In effect, is the Canada Pension Plan going to be stacked or integrated into the presen t Superannuation Plan as we know it today?

I do know, Madam Speaker, that in ma ny industries the employer has not had consultations with the employee in respe ct of the application of the Canada Pension Plan, in respect of pens ion plans now in force in the industry concerned, and this has resulted in a considerable amount of dissa tisfaction with employees where they have not been cons ulted, and I'm sure, Madam Speaker, that many will agree with me that if, say for instance you have a 5 percen t pension plan and then the employee has to add on to his pens ion plan a l. 8% in respect of the Canada Pens ion Plan, particularly with a young couple starting out in life, this becomes quite a burden insofar as the young people are concerned.

So I would be interested in hearing from the Honourable the Minister what consultations have taken place with the represe ntatives of the employees in respect of this very important matter.

Now, the other day, Madam Speaker -- first of all I note that there is a provis ion in the bill before us that where an employee retires after the 31s t day of December 1965 and before 1969, his annual superannuation allowance shall be calculated in the manner provided by this Act as it was prior to the first day of January 1966, and I would suggest that the reasons behind this is because the employee may rece ive a better pension under the old sc heme, and ce rtainly would not be entitled to the benefits under the new Canada Pension scheme because he wouldn't have got in sufficient time of contributions to the CP P in order to rece ive a pension.

When we are dealing with the question of super annuation, Madam Speaker, I would like to ask of the Minister whether or not, when the government was consider ing the question of changes in the Super annuation Act of the province, whether or not cons ideration was given to

1638 April 1, 1966 (MR •. PAULLEY cant' d) ..• those Sllpera nnuated pensioners now on the roles who rendered va luable service to the government for varying periods of time, whose pensions are less than $100. 00 per month. The other day the Minister was kind enough, Madam Speaker, to reply to an Order for Return that I had requested, dealing with the question of super annuated employees of the Government of Manitoba who rece ived less than $100 .0 0 a month by way of pension .

His reply, Madam Speaker, was to the effect that there are 255 employee s, former employees of the Province of Manitoba, who are rece iving·$10 0.0 0 or less by way of pension. ·T here are; Madam Speaker, 92 supera nnuated employees of the Province of Manitoba who are recei ving less than $40 . 00 per month, and of these 92 persons who are rece iving less than $40.0 0 per month in pens ion, there were 32 of them who had served the province for a greater per iod of time than 10 years.

There· were 28 who rece ived between $40 and $50 per month of a super annuation, of which 20 served a greater period of time in government service than 10 years. There are 32 who received between $50 and $60 per month by way of superannuation, of which 28 , Madam Speaker, served the province for a greater period than 10 years . Of those, between $60 and $70 numbering 27, 24 of them ser ved for a greater period than 10 years, and of those getting between $70 and $80 per month superannuation pens ion from the province, only one of the 26 had served less than 10 years for the Province of Manitoba.

Now, Madam Speaker, I don't think this is good enough today, and I think that the govern ment when it is changing the Superannuation Act as it is, to integrate or stack -' whichever way they're going to do it - the Canada Pens ion Plan with the prese nt plan, or change the future plan, I suggest to the Honourable Minister and the Government of Manitoba that they should take into considera tion the situation in respect of those employee s - former employees of the province who rendered good service, and I think that it is a reflection art government to find that of 255 pers ons who are on superannuation in our province -t here are 255 who are receiving less than $10 0; there are well over 200. · As a matter of fact, Madam Speaker, there are over 200 super annuated employees of the Province of Manitoba who are recei ving less than $80. 00 a month by way of supera nnuation.

And · I want to make an appeal to the Honourable· the Minister of Public Utilities and the Provincial Secreta ry; will he please take this ma tter under advisement and considera tion in order to raise up the super annuation amounts of these employees that I refer to this evening. I don't want to accuse the Honour able the Minister the Provinc ial Secretary of conducting superannuations so I some time am forced to refer to the Minister of Welfare .

So I make an appeal to you, Sir, to take under advisemen t and cons ideration the poss ibility of increasi ng pensions for supera nnuated employees that I would particularly refer to this evening. MR. H�LLHOUSE : •..••• the Honourable Minister closing the debate, Madam Speaker ? Well, I wish to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Lakeside, that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presen ted the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MR. EVANS: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, se conded by the Minister of Mines and Natural Res ources, . that the House do now adjourn.

MADAM SPEAKER presen ted the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried and the House adjourned until 2: 30 Monday afternoon.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	27-5-70
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	27th 5th hansardpdf 70.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	65aa3dd56c4280f2e4b8c845d04613df6ec94ba0

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).