Manitoba Hansard — 15 June 1982 (Sitting 76, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-76

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBL Y OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 15 June, 1982 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Pres enting Peti tions ... Rea ding and Re cei ving Peti tions ... Pr es enti ng Repor ts by St anding and Sp ecial Comm ittees ... MIN ISTERIAL STATEMEN TS AND TAB LING OF RE PO RTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. RETURN TO OR DER NO. 7 HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to file a Return to Or der of the Hous e No. 7, the Memb er for Turtle Moun tai n. RETURN TO OR DER NO. 6 HON. R. PENNER: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to table Return to Or der of the Hous e No. 6, the Me mber for Lakeside. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Energy and Min es. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a stateme nt, I have copies here. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, earlie r today the Aluminum Company of Cana da annou nced that it was postponing its long-term investment decision regard ing the Man itoba alum in um sme lter. I will now read that state ment into the record: "Alcan postpones decision in Winnip eg, Man itoba, 15th of Ju ne, 1982.

" "The Aluminum Company of Canada Lim ited said today it was postponing a decision on the possible construction of a 200,000 tonne aluminum smelter in the province. The President of the Aluminum Com pany of Can ada Lim ited, David Morton, said that the information exch ange phase of the joint review unde rtaken by Alcan and the Governm ent of Manit oba last Janua ry will be comp leted dur ing the next couple of months. Ongoing di scussi ons will also be mai ntaine d for the dur ation of the postponement . Mr.

Morton stressed that Manit oba with its hydro potential remains an attractive futu re expans ion possibility for the com pany. He said that the comp any's decision was ma de with regret. "He added that the conti nuing recess ion and its many ram ifica tions were the reason why the company decided on the postponement at this time. The deci sion, he added, reflects weak markets, lower prices, and uncertainty as to when and at what rate recovery will come . Morton said it was imp ossible to forecast when ma rkets and financial resources will permit a reassess ment of the Alcan project in Manit oba.

"The Alcan Dir ector of Development for Manit oba, Jacq ues Bougi e, said because of these developme nts 3301 it was only fair to the people of Man itoba, who have expressed su pport for this smelter project, that the compan y present the facts as they are and not main tain expectations of an early beginning of the project. Mr. Bougie also said that the company wou ld not be renewing its purchase options on about 4,000 acres of land in the rural Mun icipal ity of Rockwood. He sa id that the company wou ld not freeze this amount of land for an indefin ite period and imp ede any regional plan ning process. Mr.

Bougie said along with the present commer cial staff, Alcan will retain a liaison presence in the province to enable the company to keep abreast of developme nts in Man itoba, and to keep Man itobans aware of Alcan's plans and developme nts in the alum inum ind ustry. " That is the end of the Al can statement. I natu rally regret this decision by Alcan, but given the weak mar kets faced by the company, I can und er stand it. The current recession is taking a heavy toll. Unemplo yment across the western world is up, and economic growth and rates of capacity utili zation are down.

The alum inum ind ustry in general has reacted to the recess ion by retrenching. The start-up of the second line at Alcan's facility in Grande Baie, Qu ebec has been postponed. Over the last 8 months, 65,000 tonnes of cap acity at two other Alcan facil ities in Kit ima t and Arvida were shut down. Capa city util ization rates of other major aluminum producers such as Reynolds, Alcoa, and Kaiser have fallen. World inven tory levels have increased significantly. In these circums tances it is to be expected that new investment decisi ons will be postponed.

Alcan did not want to unfairly raise expectat ions in the light of cur rent economic reality. We respect their cand or. The joint review of the project presently be ing cond ucted by the company and the government will continue so that when economic conditions impr ove the informa tion necessary for future decisio ns will be available. On comp letion of this process the government and Alcan will maint ain comm uni cations monitoring eco nomi c conditions and the health of the aluminum indus try, in order that investment in a Mani toba smelter may be consid ered in better economi c circu mstances.

We recognize that the current recessi on is causi ng deferral and postponement of imm ediate investment by the aluminum indus try, but we firmly belie ve that, as the health of the world economy imp roves, the alu minum indus try wil l expand its capacity and will look favourably on Manit oba as a potential site for smelter development . MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Leader of the Op position. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a sad day for all Mariitobans.

The confidence of Ma nitobans and the possibili ty of obtaining for our province the first off-seaboard aluminum smelter had been bui lding since 1979 when our government first invited Al can to come to Man itoba and to look at the feasibility of such a plant. The annou ncement that we have heard today from Alcan is sad in every respect. While acknowledg ing

Tuesday, 15 June, 1982 that internati onal and world conditions played a large

part in the decision by Alcan to postpone indefin itely any further negotiatons for that plant in Man itoba, this government of Man itoba, Mr . Speaker, mu st also bear its fair and full share of responsibility for the manner in which it has allowed the negotiations on this matter to deterio rate and to deteriorate greatly si nce assu ming office on the 30th of No vember, 1981.

Indeed, as recently as Jan uary, February of 1982 Alcan was sti ll adverti si ng pub licly its intention to come into Manit oba, advertisements which appar ently were found to be offensive by the Mi nister of Mi nes and Energy and he calle d upon Alcan to stop making the advertisements in Man itoba because he and his colleague s found that offensive. Well, Mr .

Speaker, we find today that the first of these large projects, for which the previous ad min is tration had been working very hard to bring to our province, is now back to square one, far from having concluded a Mem orandum of Under standing with Alcan, which would have at least been an island from which future governments cou ld have moved forward. This government is in the very awkward position of putti ng Manit obans back right where they started. There is no land for the site in Man itoba; the land options are bei ng given up.

There's no agreement with Hydr o on a long-term basis whereby Hydr o power would have been avai lable and Alcan would have become the largest customer in the history of Mani toba Hydr o, taking someth ing like 10 percent of its current produc tion. Now all of that is lost and gone by the wayside and it remains for some government in the futu re, and it won't be a government of the political stripe of the ones who sit opposite us, Mr. Speaker.

It remains for a government of vision, unde rstand ing and prud ence to restructure this whole agreement that has been lost and dropped by virtue of the annou ncement today. I, Sir, make a pledge on be half of this party that we stand ready to ma ke that kind of restructured agreement possible for the benefit of all Man itobans and not, Mr.

Speaker, to permit our tunnel vis ion, to permit our ideology as our honourable friends opposite did to preclude them from negotiat ing in good faith with a company that was prepared to come to Man itoba in good faith, to ba rgain hard and to ba rgain fairly for thou sa nds of jobs opportu nities for Manit obans. So, Mr. Speaker, we don't welcome this annou ncement by the Min ister at all.

We know, Sir , that this government has in the first six months demo nstrated its comple te ineptitude in tryi ng to carry forward negotiations which were left to it to carry through and one can only have the gravest suspicion, having heard this annou ncement today, that the Western Inter-Tie Agreement is be ing faced with the sa me kind of recalcitrance by this govern ment as indeed the Alcan negotiations were and that the potash negotiation is in the same sorry state.

So, Sir , that is why, as you are well aware, I will be movi ng at the conclusion of the Or ders of the Day a motion to adjourn the House on this matter of urgent public imp ortance so that we may have a debate here and now in this Legislature about this great body blow to the eco nomy of Manit oba which has been annou nced, and about the plans of this government to try to restore some hope and some confi dence to small busin ess people, to farmers and to other people in Manit oba that they know someth ing, anyth ing at all, about makin g our economy grow and expand for the benefit of futur e generati ons.

That's why, Sir , I'll be moving that motion as you are well aware, your having previously had notice of it, and I will resu me further remarks on this black day for Manitoba at that time . MR. SPEAKER: Mi nisterial State ments and Tabl ing of Reports . Notices of Motion ... Introduction of Bills IN TROD UCTI ON OF GUES TS MR. SPEAKER: Before we reach Oral Question Period, I should di rect the attention of honourable me mbers to the gallery, where we have 25 students of Grade 6 standing from the Nellie Mc Clung Collegia te, under the dir ection of Mrs. Mu eller.

The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Memb er for Pembi na. There are 23 students of Grade 6 and 7 standin g of the Barrows Ju nction School. The students are und er the direction of Mr . Kustiak and the school is in the constituency of the Honou rable Me mber for Swan Ri ver. There are 25 students of Gr ade 8 standing of the Pi nawa Secondary School, und er the di rection of Mr. Bob Rei mer. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Minis ter of Government Services. On be half of all of the memb ers, I welcome you here this afternoon. OR AL QUES TIONS MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Oppo sition. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honour able Me mber for Lakeside, that und er Rul e 27, the ordi nary busine ss of the House be set aside to di scuss a matter of urgent public imp ortance; name ly, the anno un cement by Al can of the postponement . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Or der please. If the honourable member will consult Rul e 27(1 ), he will find that the Motion should be made after Or al Questions and before the Or ders of the Day. 3302 HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, with respect, I did and I am moving the Motion after Or al Que stions has been called and before the Orders of the Day. MR. SPEAKER: It's my read ing of Rule 27 that the Motion should be made after Or al Que stion Period has been comple ted, not the announcement of the beginning of Oral Que stions. HON. S. LYON: With respect, Sir, I think you will find that the Motion has been moved in this manner on other occasi ons and I dare say it has been moved in the manner to which you ma ke reference. We are, of cou rse, in your hands and I'l l move the Motion now or at the end of qu estion period.

It will be moved, Sir , I can guar antee you that, but we're qu ite willing to abide by your judgment in this matter.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government Hous e Leader. HON. R. PE NNE R: Just on the point of order, your ruli ng, with respect, is absolutely correct. The read ing of the rule, and our attention has been drawn to the rule s all too often by the Leader of the Op position , is that after Oral Qu estions and the routi ne busine ss, not after Or al Que stions have been called. That was a gloss on the part of the Leader of the Op position, but after Or al Qu estions in the rout ine busi ness, and this side certainly supp orts your ruling on that point. MR.

SPEAKER: If there is no other memb er wishing to advise the Chair on this matter - the Honour able Memb er for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHER MAN: Mr . Speaker , I would like to say that in my experienc e in this House, and I'm sur e there are colleagues on both si des of the House who would agree, it's been done both ways. I certainly have been here when a motion to adjo ur n the Hous e on urgent public busine ss has been put and that the debate has been held prior to Que stion Period. It's simpl y a mat ter of your di scretion, Sir . MR.

SPEAKER: I believe the honourable memb er is correct that it has been done both ways and there see ms to have been little uni formit y in the past. How ever, my read ing of the Ru les says that after Or al Qu est ions , and I will take that to mean after Or al Que stions is comple ted. Therefore, the Honour able Leader of the Op posi tion wi ll be entitled to ma ke his motion upon the com pletion of the Oral Qu estion Period. ORAL QUESTI ONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Op positi on. HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, in anticip ation then of the deba te, which sub ject to your ruling may take place at the conclusion of Or al Que stio ns, may I ask a qu est ion to the First Min ister? Gi ven the news that we have had today about the indefi nite suspension of Alcan's plans for the estab lish ment of an aluminum sme lter in Mani toba and the consequent loss of many thousands of job opportuni ties, can the First Min ister give this House and the people of Mani toba any reas su rance at all as to progress that is being ma de with respect to (

a) the negotiations on the Western Inter Tie, which are the key to resuming construction on Limes tone Plant; and (

b) the suc cess or otherwise of negotiations that we ex pect are ongoing concern ing the establish ment of the first potash min e in Mani toba? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, first in connection with the potash negotiations , the Mini ster will be mue ting with the potas h people in the next two or three weeks and as the Leader of the Op posit ion knows from earlie r qu est ions posed in the Hous e, we're awaiting advice from the Min ister in Saskatche wan as to the resump tion of negotiations. 15 June, 1982 HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, given the fact that the Mi nister of Mi nes and Energy was in di scussion with Alcan as recently as April and May of 1982, and given the fact that we've had the unfortuna te announ cement today that we have had from Al can, is the Min ister not becoming a little worried like some of us; it may be that the more negotiations he has the least likely we are to get the projects in Man itoba? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I think in response to the que stion from the Leader of the Opp osition that we obviously have to speak about economic reality. I have in my hand an

article which appeared in June 11t h, Friday, Globe and Mail: "1 ,200 potash workers face a two -mon th layof f in the Province of Saskatchewan." So, Mr . Speaker, honourable mem bers ma y try to ignore the reality of the present international eco nomi c recession, but the situation is clear for all to review. With head lines like this, Mr. Speaker, involving some 1,200 workers being laid off in Saskatchewan in the potash ind ustry, any person with any realistic bent knows that di scus sions at this time are agai nst a background of economic recession. HON. S. LYON: Well, Mr.

Speaker, to get down to specific s, cou ld we then ask the First Min ister if he could advise, and if he doesn' t have the information at hand, of cou rse, I would expect he would take the que stion as notice, if he could advise as to the numb er of occasions on which he, or his responsible Mini ster or Min isters, have met with the principal officers of IMC since November 30, 1981, with respect to the esta blish ment of the first potash min e in Mani toba? HON. H. PAWLEY: We'll accept that que stion as notice. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, I di rect my que stion to the Min ister in charge of McKenzie Seeds, and would ask him if he could inform the House how much money the government will be giving to McKen zie Seeds in order to refinanc e its debt load, which occurred over the last ten years because of some fairly large losses? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Com muni ty Services. HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, the honourable memb er asks a policy que stion, and when a policy deci sion has been finally made he and the rest of Man itoba will be advised. 3303 MR. R. BANMAN: Well, Mr.

Speaker, in light of the Min ister making remarks that he wi ll be makin g an announ cement that has been reported in the Brandon Sun, I wonder if the Minis ter cou ld advise the House whether or not they will be entering the Me xican ma rket? HON. L. EVANS: Mr Speaker, I'll take that que stion as notice and consul t with the mana gement of

the com pany. MR. R. BANMAN: Agai n, in light of the statements that the Mini ster has made in Brandon, I wonder if he could inform the House whether or not the company will be moving into other markets. such as the U.S. market, and expan ding their operations? HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker. I understand that the Board and the ma nagement are considering certain expansions. but the details of that will be revealed in due course I understand. MR. R.

BANMAN: I wonder if the Min ister could con firm that in Brandon he has said that the government will be refi nancing the company within the matter of a week, and tha t he wi ll also be making annou ncements that the compa ny will be expanding its operations into other areas and emplo ying some thing like 50 new people? HON. L. EVANS: Well. Mr. Speaker. either the

article did n't quo te me properly or the honourable memb er hasn't read the

article correctly. In a numb er of his statements. therefore, that he's jus t made I reject, because I did not make those numb ers that he refers to. nor some of those statements he refers to. The Govern ment of Man itoba has indi cated, and we've indic ated this in Comm ittee, that we're prepared to consider refinancing. Whenever that decision is made, an annou ncement will be made. HON. S. LYON: Mr . Speaker. a further que stion to the First Min ister.

Could the First Min ister advise as to whether or not he and his government are making any progress whatsoever with respect to negotiations with other aluminum companie s for the establishm ent of aluminum smelti ng facilities in Mani toba? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Mi nister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker. the Min isterof Ene rgy and Mi nes has had some disc ussion recently and I would ask him to respond to the qu estion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Min ister of Energy and Mi nes. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, we have had dis cussions with some other alum inum compan ies.

They have been informing us that the recession. the world wide recession, is affecting all of them pretty severely, that some of them have gone down to as low as 45 percent of their produc tive capacity in the United States. and tha t weighs very heavily in terms of any short-term investment decision that they might be able to make anywhere in the world with respect to aluminum smelting. We have had some interest shown by other alu mi num compan ies and they are prepared to start - one of them is prepared to start some work in terms of taking a more det aile d look at Ma nitoba.

Another has expressed interest to probably und ertake that work in Man itoba wi thin the near futu re. I think all aluminum comp anies realize that Mani toba does have long-term potential with respect to futur e and potential alumi - 15 June, 1982 num smelt ers in this province to serve the mi dwest. While that is being pursued, Mr . Speaker, I think it would be prematur e at this time to indic ate the com panies' names, because I certainly haven't been in contact with them as to whether in fact they would like their names released. If in fact that's the wis h.

I can certainly be in touch with these compan ies and indi cate to them that qu estions have been asked. but certainly I would like to check with them first. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Oppo sition. HON. S. LYON : Well, Mr. Speaker. it's certainl y no secret that the previous government had prelimi nary di scussions with Kaiser Aluminum and with Alu max, and those name s have been used before in the House.

With respect to those two com panies. can the Min ister of Mi nes and Energy give us any further progress report on those negotiations. and indeed if he has been talking to any other aluminum companie s. and if he doesn't wish to name them without their approval that's understand able, could he tell us if there are any other aluminum com panies with whom he is cu rrently in either early or medium term negotiations. or what is the status of these alternate negotiations? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Energy and Mi nes. HON. W. PARASIUK: We certainly have been in di s cussion with Alu max. and Kaiser.

There are two other alum inum compan ies that have expressed interest and have been in touch with us, after we contacted them in the original instance. Indeed in respect to both Alu max and Kaiser, they were indeed contacted by the previous government. I believe one of the meet ings between the previous government officials and one of the compan ies took place in Edmon ton some time in September of 1981.

So that at that stage, I think the other compan ies weren't sur e of the seriousne ss of the government, but I think they were contacted by the previous admin istration to pursue the possi bili ty of other com panie s being interested in setting up an aluminum sme lter in Ma nitoba. 3304 We indeed have had some follow-up sessions to that, follow-up correspondenc e.

I ind eed have had a meeting with one of the com panies dir ectly and it is hoped that I could be able to provide further informa tion in thi s respect over the cou rse of the next two or three weeks, or a month or so. to the people of Mani toba; but I certainly would want to be in touch with all the companie s first in terms of talking to them about what they would lik e to have released to the public at this time. but we certainl y are pursuing di scus sions with other aluminum com panies. HON. S. LYON: Mr .

Speaker, given the fact that the previous government and comm on sense had indi cated that it was in the long-term and short-term interests of Manit obans to be on the lookout in nego tia ting with power-i ntensive com panies. that is. com panies whose indus trial or other operations requir e a good deal of power in Ma nitoba thereby creating jobs from our electrical Hydr o sou rce in Man itoba for Man itobans. can the Mini ster indi cate if he cu rrently has

15 June, 1982 under negotiat ion, either he or his colleaugue , the Min ister of Economic Developm ent, any other negoti ations with any other power-i ntensive indus tries in the world with the idea in min d that they could come to Manitoba, establish job opportun ities here and take advantage in a way fair to Man itoba ratepayers of our Hydro resou rce? HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, in this respect a few weeks ago some Mini sters met with the Japanese Am bass ador to Canada and we raised these specific points because the cost of energy in Ja pan is very high right now and si nce they rely on coal or thermal produc ed electricity futur e costs will be very high. We indic ated to them that we believe there were some very good opportunities here in Man itoba for energy intensiv e ind ustries. We are hoping to follow that up with the Japanese Government and with large Japa nese firms.

We are hoping that may provide one pos sibili ty, especially since the Japanese compan ies, although they're feeling the im pact of the worldwide recession, they don' t seem to be feeling it qu ite as deeply as other companie s. We hope that would be an area that could be pursued over the cou rse of the summer and through the fall. llll R. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Tux edo. MR. G. FIL l\ll ON: Thank you , Mr . Speaker. My que s tion is for the Honour able Mini ster responsible for the Envir onment.

I wonder if the Min ister can ind icate whether or not his department was aware or has approved of the practice which has apparently been carried out dur ing the past few weeks of dumpi ng hundr eds of litres of toxic and radi oactive chem icals in the Cha rleswood Sewage Lagoon. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of No rthern Affairs. HON. J. COWAN: Yes, thank you , Mr . Speaker.

Well, the Envi ronmental Ma nagement Division has been ma de aware of the practice as has many in the prov ince through the media reports and, as a result of those reports, we have contacted the Ci ty of Winn ipeg to di scuss this matter with them. As the mem ber is aware, the transportation disp osal of radi oactive isotopes is a matter that comes und er the responsibili ty of the Atomic Energy Control Board, so we have reviewed the regula tions that are in place and have found that, in this instance, there are no regulations that would in fact prevent this practice.

The situa tion was such that these radi oactive iso topes were dis posed of previously by incine ration but in Ma y of 1979, as the former Mini ster of the Envir on ment is aware, the incinerator of the City of Winn ipeg was closed down. Si nce that time, they've been stored at the No rth End Pollution Control Pla nt. About sev eral weeks ago, or a couple of months ago, workers at that plant became concerned about the storage of flammable radio isotope materials in a confi ned space and the City declared that it would no longer accept the storage of those materials at that particular facil ity.

Conseque ntly, they informed the Health Scienc es Centre and the un iversity of that decision and the Health Scienc es Cen tre has been dumping the radioisotopes into the Char leswood Lagoon di rectly. We are informed that thi s is perm itted under the exis t ing regulations. However, the Ci ty has informed the Health Scienc es Centre that they will no longer be able to pursue thi s practice and that they will have to store those radi oactive isotopes until such a time as they can transp ort them to Chalk Ri ver or until such a time as they can find another su itable means of dis posal. MR. G.

FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, a supp le me ntary qu esti on. Si nce the treated effluent from the lagoon is ulti mately di schar ged to the Assi niboine Riv er, is his staff concerned about the possible effects of these toxic and rad ioactive wastes downstream on the Assinib oine and Red Ri vers? HON. J. COWAN: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we're certainly concerned about any potential problems which may arise out of the disposal and the dumping of these radioactive isotopes in any area and we think that it is a matter which we share concerns with in regard to the general populus and the users of those radi oactive isotopes as well. That is why we have been qui ck to contact the Ci ty, even although we have no di rect responsi bili ty in this regard, we have wanted to make those concerns well-known. We are advised by the Atomic Energy Control Board that those concerns are unfounded.

They advise us that there is no di fficulty due to the low radi oactive levels of the radioactive isotopes being di sposed of in this way. However, notwithstanding their good advice, we agree with the Cit y when the City has sug gested that it is not a proper procedure to continu e the di spo sal of those materials in the Cha rleswood Lagoon and we commend them on their action and are working with them at the present time to ensur e that proper di sposal means are found .

We are doing that without any direct relationship to the situation; however, we are doing so because we share his concern and the concerns of ma ny that we find a proper di sposal and transportation method for dang erous and hazardous commod ities such as the ones that are bei ng presently di sposed of in this way. MR. G. FILMON: Mr .

Speaker, in view of the fact that the former New Democratic Government exem pted the City of Winn ipeg from coming under The Cl ean Environment Act with respect to su rface water qual ity water stan dards, is his governme nt now consid ering placing the Ci ty under The Clean Envir onment Act with respect to the su rface water quali ty sta ndards so that they can have some di rect involvement in the proper handl ing and di sposal of such dang erous chem icals in futu re? 3305 HON. J.

COWAN: Well, the previous Min ister of the Environ ment knows full well that his government had four years to undertake that sort of activity and failed to do so for whatever reasons. We will not fail to do so. I want to di scuss this matter with the involved parties. I want to see if we can reach a satisf actory conclusion to what may be some problem areas. I want to see if we can, as a government, bring to bear the res ponsibil ity which we have to ensur e that the water qual ity of this entire province is well looked after.

We will do what is necessary to do that and if that involves sit ting down and talking with the city about the cu rrent exem ption we, unlike them, will not be afraid to und ertake that activity. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a que stion for the Min ister of Labour regard ing the Career lnternship Program. The Mini ster has told this House that he is main taining an ongoing review of that program and that he is willing to look at ways of responding to the needs of you ng people se eking summer empl oyment.

In light of the conti nuing economic problems we're faced with because of the worldwide recession, and in light of the fact that stu dents were faci ng a more dif ficu lt time in finding sum mer jobs this year, I was wonder ing if the Min ister could ind icate whether the program is going to be changed in any way to accommo date the needs of these students. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Labour. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. That is a very good qu estion.

As the memb er noted we had originally set aside $2.9 million for this program and I had ind icated dur ing the Estim ates that there might be some chan ges, and the re were. We annou nced later on that there wou ld be an additi onal, up to $4 milli on all ocated to this program and, as of today, we have approxi mately 2,000 positions which have been approved und er the program and jus t a little less than two out of three are in the private sector.

We are concerned abou t the conti nuing economi c dif ficulti es in the province and high interest rates, etc., therefore, in order to attempt to open up the program further and to ensur e that a sign ificant portion of that $4 million is used, we are going to change the program so that any emplo yer who has less than 50 emp loyees will be entitled to apply for the program and, of cou rse, they would have to meet the same criteria that we had ind icated in the beginning. We would not have been able to do this had we not added the money, so the two had to come together.

If we did n't have the money, we could n't have gone up to the 50 emplo yees from the 10. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Tu xedo. MR. G. FILM ON: Mr . Speaker, again a que stion to the Min ister of the Environ ment referring to the chem icals in the Char leswood Sewage Lagoon. In view of the fact that two of the chemic als xylene and toluene are insoluble in water and are labeled as highly flamma ble, is there a dang er of explosion or fire at the lagoon because of their presence? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Min ister of Northern Affairs. HON. J.

COWAN: I'm informed that the Atomic Energy Control Board, in its review of this ma tter, has sug gested that this is an appropriate way, from their pers pective and in their opinion, to dis pose of these sub - 15 June, 1982 stances. I could only conjecture from that, that they have looked at the problem with flammabil ity, as they are well aware that is one of the qua lities associated with these particu lar wastes.

That is not to say that we agree that it is a proper way to dis pose of these partic ular su bstances and that is why we are now having the di scussi ons, which I indic ated earlie r we are having, with the Ci ty to assist them in finding a way which is more to their liking in respect to dispo sal of these su bstances. So to answer his qu esti on, according to the AECB, perhaps not. However, I don' t believe that in any way should deter us from in fact attempting to find a better way of di sposing of these hazardous wastes. MR. G. FILMON: Mr . Speaker, I have a que stion for the Min ister of Natural Resou rces.

In view of the fact that a great ma ny wild fowl, namely ducks and geese, find this a normal habitat - the Charleswood Sewage Lagoon - a normal place to land, as their habitat, is there any concern on his part for the welfare of the duc ks and geese and their exis tence there? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Natu ral Resources. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I have often won dered about the advisability of these birds landing on those polluted waters because they are sewage cells, but you know we can't do mu ch about that.

But we can do someth ing about what the honourable memb er is concerned about and I share the concerns of every one in respect to hazardous waste disp osal and I think my colleague has qui te properly identi fied the con cerns of this government with that, and I fully sub scribe to the position taken by the Ci ty that these wastes should be dis posed of by Atomic Energy of Canada. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Spe aker. I dir ect a que stion to the Mini ster responsible for Crown lands.

I have noticed over the past several months that the government is conti nuing to sell certain Crown lands, among them some agricultur al leased lands. My que s tion to the Mini ster is, has the government come to a conclusion with respect to their futur e policy with respect to sale of agricultu ral leased Crown lands? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Natu ral Resources. 3306 HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to ma ke further com ment about government policy in that respect. When we came into office, Mr.

Speaker, we found that there was a significant expedition in the sale of Crown lands, a concern to ma rket ma ny many more acres of Crown lands, and that erodes wildl ife habitat that's a concern for all those who enjoy Crown lands for the mul tipu rposes that are avai lable with them. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to confirm MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. Could the Honourable Memb er for Lakeside save his point of order?

MR. H. ENNS: It's only out of the generosity of my heart that I don' t want the Minister to continue on in error. I specifi cally referred to agricu ltural leased land. This is land that has been vetted through the wildlife exper ts of the government and has been deemed to be suitable for agricu ltural purposes and is cu rrently in light tenureship with agricultu rists, with farmers. MR. SPEAKER: I'm not sur e whether that was a mat ter of a point of order, but I thank the honourable memb er for his clarifica tion. The Honour able Mini ster of Natu ral Resour ces. HON. A. MACKING: Thank you, Mr . Speaker.

The honourable memb er did not have a point of order but he added some information, but the informa tion he added is incorr ect. Now you see, Mr. Speaker, that indicates the lack of und ersta nding of a former Mini s ter as to what Crown lands provide for. Agricu ltu ral Crown lands that are under lease are available to hunters, to berry pickers, to mushr oom hunters, to natu ralists, to anyone who wants to enter on Crown lands. We have not author ized lessees of Crown lands to prevent the public from using those lands for the mul tipu rposes that are available to them.

Now, the honour able member wants to know whether there has been any sig nificant change in pol icy. I have indi cated we were concerned about very significant sales of Crown lands, 26 and 30 quar ters of Crown lands to individual applicants. We are still look ing at Crown lands sales policy but we have an ongo ing process and we are dealing with indi vid ual appli catio ns, including residential Crown lands for full-time residents, indi vid ual recreatio nal Crown lands and yes, agricultur al Crown lands. We are not hung up philosophically about Crown lands.

We want Crown lands to be used by the people of Ma nitoba. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I'm tur ning three bulls out on some of my Crown land. I would hope that they don't run into any mushr oom pickers or berry pickers, that cou ld cause a conflict of interest. But, Mr. Speaker , specifi cally, in the Or ders-in Counc il passed on Jun e 9 of this past week, there are agricultur al Crown land leases that are being sold in the constituency of The Pas. My reason for the que s tion is, I want to know how selective this policy is on the part of the government.

Wil l agricultu ral Crown lands be sold in ND P-held constitue ncies only, or by NDP applicati on? -(l nterjection)-W ell, Mr. Speaker, I think we have to know. We either have a policy or we don't have a policy. Is it up to the Minister's discretio n when Crown lands will be sold and when they will not be sold and to whom? We eit her have a policy or we don't have a policy. Now if their policy is, no Crown land sales, I can respect that; that's a well-known position of my friends opposite.

But if I see weekly and monthly sales of Crown lands taking place in the absence of any stated policy, then they are open to charges of favour itism and political patronage. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, to begin with I don't know what the honourab le me mber has against mushr ooms or mushr oom pickers. I don't know what 15 June, 1982 he's got against berry pickers. I don't know what he's got against people who love the enviro nment for the env iro nm ent sake, but wha t I do know, Mr. Speaker ... -(Int erjection)- MR. SPEAKER: Or der please. The Honourable Minis ter of Natu ral Resou rces. HON. A.

MACKLING: What I do know, Mr. Speaker, is that the honourable memb er and some of the rest of the honou rable memb ers opposite have a guilty con science about Crown land, and when an NDP gov ernment is dea ling with Crown land then they suspe ct that we are going to look at the sales of Crown land the way they would look, in a partisan political way. That is not our approach to fair dealing in governme nt and that's not a lot of bull. 3307 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. My que stion is for the Minister responsible for the Ma ni toba Telephone Syste m.

Did the Mini ster author ize the hiring by MTS of the former president of I nterdis com Systems Limited, and does that hiring in any way constitute an undertaking by Mani toba Telephone System to further advance Project Ida in the City of Winnipeg at considerable cost? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com mu nity Services. HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member asked me a que stion related to a story that appeared in today's newspaper and as I read it, I first became aware of this particu lar hiring.

Of cou rse, the honour able memb er refers to a company who is involved in the MTS in a loan that was transacted while he was Mini ster, or at least when he and his colleague s were in government. At any rate, upon reading the

article I enquired, and I understand that the position became vacant as a result of an internal promotion within the Ma nitoba Telephone System. The position was advertised within MTS and out side in the newspapers and the indi vid ual, Mr . John Coyne, was chosen by a selection board as the most qua lified candidate. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, Mr .

Speaker, can the Mini s ter provide the assurance to all Ma nitobans that thi s does not represent a fur therance by MTS on their own of further expend itu res of funds on Proj ect Ida in the City of Winnipeg, a point of particular concern at this ti me when MTS is going before the Pu blic Utility Board for a su bstantial rate increase? HON. L.

EVANS: Well, I would imagine and my advice is that this is a very com petent indi vid ual with a lot of technical qu alificatio ns and would be a use ful memb er of an MTS staff regardless of what project the MTS happen to be involv ed in and I would trus t that there is no connection whatsoever between the hiring of this indi vidual, who happened to be involv ed in that pro ject a year or so ago, and any expans ion of Proj ect Ida or, indeed, any other similar expansion.

Tuesday, 15 June, 1982 MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, Mr. Speaker, si nce the Min ister can't offer the assurance that this does not represent a fur therance of Project Ida, wou ld he con si der recalling the Publi c Ut ilities Comm ittee and hav ing the Man itoba Telephone System appear before that Comm ittee to answer those que stions dir ectly? HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I'm not sur e whether I have the power to recall or reconstitute a Commit tee of the Legisla ture myself or not.

But at any rate, in light of the honourable memb er's enqu iries, I shall certainly undertake to obtain that assurance from the Mani toba Telephone Sys tem. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for lnkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a que stion for the Mini ster of Labour. In this morni ng's paper and early morning's news we had recognition of what we had feared may be jus t a start some month ago when Canadian National annou nced the layoff of some 1,200 workers.

That layoff has now been extended an additional two weeks to a 10-week layoff, which will include a four-week shut down, plus the fou r weeks they had previously announced, plus an additional two weeks. Previous to that, Mr. Speaker, we had understood that there wou ld be pr obably close to 80 percent, I believe, of their salaries will be paid over the full term. Has the Min ister any indic ati on from the Federal Gov ernment whether the provisions under The Unem ployment Insur ance Act, which were enacted pre viously, will carry forth to the additional two-week period layoff? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Labour. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, there was qui te a bit of noise during that que stion and I did n't get the whole thing. Could I ask the memb er to repeat it, please? MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Spea ker. I'll try and make it a li ttle mo re concise. We ju st ha d an announ cement by C. N., Mr. Speaker, that the layoff that they had previously annou nced as eight weeks will now be 10 weeks.

What I'm wondering, is the Mi nister aware whether or not the Unemp loyment Insu rance Commis sion, the Federal Agency, will be able to exte nd the coverage to these workers for the new two-week layoff, as they did for the previous four-week layoff? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, as I under sta nd The Unempl oyment Insur ance Act, the workers wou ld be entit led to more leave than the eight weeks provid ing they had worked for more than one year.

Of course there was an arrangement made with respect to the first eight weeks because of the contract between the union and the rai lways which provides for an addi tional sum to the workers above that being paid by UIC. I have not been in commun icat ion with UIC or the rai lways with respect to whether that same provi sion appli es to the next two weeks, but I have no reason to believe that it does not. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Turtle Moun tain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, my que stion is for the Mi nister of Fina nce.

When the government first called upon the Federal Government to allow the value of the Canadian dollar to drop agai nst the Am erican dollar, the Canadian dollar stood in the range of 83 point some cents. Si nce that time the value of the Canadian dollar has dropped to the range of 78 cents. Has the Mi nister of Finance been in touch with the Federal Government to commend them and suppor t them in their efforts which have led to that deva lua tion of the dollar? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, when we were in Ottawa at the First Mi nisters' Conference, we were calli ng for lower interest rates; that's what we were calling for. There was a sugge stion at that time that with lower interest rates the dollar wou ld fall several cents. The Government of Canada has for the last long period of time, artific ally propped up the value of the Canadian dollar with the use of high interest rates and the purchase of large nu mbers of Canadi an dol lars and certainl y that has cost an awful lot of money in the last while.

We have not comm end ed the government for not following wha t we requested, along with all of the other provi nces in this country at that time. We were request ing lower interest rates, which we recognized migh t lead to a some what lower dol lar. Now what we have now experie nced is higher interest rates and therefore a dr op in the dollar, which is specific ally what we were predicting in the long run. 3308 II you kill the economy we are eventually going to have a lower dollar and tha t's what has been happen ing. We have followed, unfortunately, the advice of the people opposite and the Federal Govern ment.

They had belie ved all along that policy would stre ngthen the dolla r; it is now proof and it's bei ng proven that their policy is in fact giving us the worst of all worlds. We're get ting a weaker dollar; we're getting high interest rates; and we have an economy that is not moving forward in this entire country, so this is again proof positive that their policy isn' t working. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, a supple mentary que stion to the Min ister of Finance.

Has the Mi nister of Finan ce commun icated to Ottawa the range of the value of the Canadian dollar, which they would be prepared to see in return for say a drop of one percen tage point in the prime interest rate? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Well, Mr. Speaker, mem bers on that side and the Federal Government - both the Tories in Man itoba and the Federal Liberals - were sa ying back in Februar y that what we want is a high dollar; we want to leave the dollar, prop the dollar up where it is; and to do that we will have to have high interest rates. We were sa ying on this side that we want lower rates.

That is something that was being said by everyone else in the country, including Tory Gove rnments in other provi nces, who were in fairly similar circu ms tances to us; some in better circu m-

sta nces, some in worse circumstances. They were all saying the same thing, except these people who, with the Federal Government, believed that they are the only people in step in the march. Everybody else is wrong, ju st the Mani toba Tories and the Federal Min ister of Financ e are in step. We believe they're wrong. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr . Speaker, a supple mentary que stion to the First Mini ster, in view of the fact that the Mini ster of Fina nce fails to answer the que stions placed to him.

If the Prime Minister of the cou ntry responds to the First Mini ster's call for a conference on the economy, wi ll the Provincial Government be putting forward concrete proposals to the Federal Governme nt, which wi ll set out such things as the value of the Cana dian dollar, that would be acceptable to the Ma nitoba Governme nt, in return for a drop of one percentage point in the interest rate. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Mini ster. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, we've already pres ented a sub mission to the Federal Governme nt Feb ruary 2nd to the 4th of this year and that sub mission was very clear as to the position of the Govern ment of the Province of Ma nitoba. Mr . Speaker, it's regrettable that the contents of that su bmi ssio n, plus some excellent subm issions from other provinces, were not heeded by the Federal Gove rnment.

It's my view that if there had been a determined examina tion of the various proposals that were outline d Febru ary 2nd to Febru ary 4th this year to the Federal Gover nment, we'd be in a mu ch health ier situation economica lly now throughout the country. MR. SPEAKER: The time for oral que stio ning having expired, the Honour able Leader of the Oppos itio n. MATTER OF URG ENC Y HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, I beg to move, seco nded by the Honou rable Memb er for Lakeside, THAT under Rul e 27 the ordin ary bus iness of the Hous e be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent pu blic impor tance, namely: the announ cement by Alcan of the postponement for an inde finite period of the establi shment of an $800 million sme lter in Mani toba's Interlake, and the con seq uent loss of thousands of job opp ortu nities for Ma nitobans, and the adverse effect on Ma nitoba Hydr o and the whole economy of our province. MR.

SPEAKER: In accordance with our Rule 27 the honourable mem ber has five min utes to expla in the urgency of the matter to the Hous e. The Honourable Leader of the Oppo sition. HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, as has already been alluded to in the cou rse of comm ents mad e by the Minister of Mines and Energy and the brief response that I made thereto, this is a serious and a black day for the eco nomy of Ma nitoba, and it is one of those days which requires that this House, Sir, under your gui dance, absents itself from its regular line of bus iness and starts to deal with an annou ncement that was made this morning. 15 June, 1982 I realize that the purpose of these few remarks at this time is to reflect upon the urgency of the debate and, Sir, I ca n think of nothing more urgent in the minds of thousands of Ma nitobans who are out of work today; I can thin k of nothing more urgent in the minds of small busine ss people in Ma nitoba than the fact that the hope that they had for the establi shment of this ind ustry in our province has now been frus trated; I can think of nothing more urgent, Mr.

Speaker, than the need in this province at this time to have our hope bolstered by the establi shment of some major ind ustry of this kind in order that we can see down the road some beacon of hope for the futur e development and growth of our economy in this province. So I thin k, Sir, if I may say so, that the urgency of the que stion is almo st without debate, because this is a body blow to our economy. It is some thing that deserves the attention of this House.

We had been proceeding under the expectation from the Minister of Mine s and Energy, que stions that have been asked on nu merous occasio ns in this House, that all of the negotiatio ns were proceeding satisfac torily, were proceeding very well and it was upon that, that people in the Interlake had sent peti tions into the government, and they were assu red that everything was proceeding well, that the Joint Review was under way and all of this was going along qui te swim mingly.

I believe the Minister said at one stage - and I have his direct qu ote here, I'll save it for another occasion - that he was hopeful that some sort of reso lution of these discussions could take place later on this year. Then the hope was held out that Mani tobans would be able to begin to taste some of the benefits of this huge ind ustrial enterprise which could come to our province and add that new dime nsion to our economy that had never been here before. But, Mr . Speaker, that was all sh attered this morning when Alcan annou nced that they were not proceeding. Not only that they were not proceeding, Mr.

Speaker, but that the options on land for the site that they had selected had been given up; that thereby the negotia tions which were well advanced with Hydr o, tho se negotiations were back to squ are one, and that all of the work of two-a nd-a-half to three years had gone down the tub e- to use the street exp ression - and that this particular project is regrettably, Sir, dead in the water. 3309 Now, Sir, I sugge st that this requires this House to give some attention to it on this day in order that we may hear from the government, their side of the story with respect to the Alcan announ cement this morn ing; hear from the government hopefull y some idea of hope or confidence that they can hold out for the tens of thousand s of people in Ma nitoba who are cou nting upon this developme nt to take place in our province, to provide jobs for you ng people, to provide that kind of economic buttressing that our economy so badly needs at this time.

It mig ht be said, Sir, that the statement made by the Minister afforded debate. You know and I know, Sir, that is not the case because it can only be responde d to and then only briefly by one memb er of the Op posi tio n. It mig ht be said, Sir, that because the Sup ply Motio n is still on the Or der Paper, that is the time to debate it. I say that is not good enough, Sir, because we have no guar antee that the governme nt will call the

Su pply Motion today. I say it's a clear case of overrid ing im portance to the people of Man itoba which requir es this House to set aside its regular order of busine ss and get on with di scussi ng one of the most severe body blows to our economy that has been announc ed for some years in this province. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General will also have five mi nutes. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker. this is a motion to set aside the ordina ry busi ness of the House on a ma tter of urgent pub lic imp ortance. No w, no one wou ld di s agree with the notion that it is a ma tter of public im portance.

Indeed , I would like to think that most of the matters brou ght before this Hous e dur ing the bus iness of the House, the busi ness that we have to call this afternoon, is on matters of public im portance. The que stion is that of urgency and I turn very briefly to the qu estion of urgency as it has been traditi onally add ressed on motions of this kind and I will cite author ity. Look at the que stion of urgency in two ways. First of all, if I may desc ribe it that way, in junctively, that is, is there some thing which the government can do? The answer is clearly, no, we are faced with a fait accompli.

The citation which I will give in a moment from Beau chesne add resses that qu esti on. There mu st be some thing within the com petence of the governme nt which it can do to add ress the situ ation which is deemed to be a matter of urgent public im portance. That is clear in the citations in Beauchesne and indeed we were met with a fait accompli. Al can not only said that this is what it is going to do, Alcan in the reply to a que stion by the President of Alcan, Mr. Morton, said that indeed there was nothing it could do.

Answer by David Morton, "There is no specific action seen in Canada which can change a situation for the aluminum indus try which is influ enced by the worldwide recess ion. Alcan, particu larly, which depends on the U.S. ma rket, is influ enced by U.S. economic conditions. Basically, nothing can be done in Canada to alter postponement decisions." That was a state ment made today by the President of Alcan. If Alcan can do nothing, there is nothing which this government can do. Secondly, with respect to the que stion of urgency, Mr. Speaker.

On the que stion of whether or not there is an opportuni ty to debate the qu estion, clear ly there is. Gi ven the very stage we're at in the proceed ings in this House within a very short period of ti me, within days, the Su pply Motion mu st be called, the memb ers know that. It was adver ted to by the Leader of the Op position. The nature of the Su pply Motion, when Main Supply mus t be debated, is across-the-waterfront kind of debate which will give the Op position every opportu nity to debate the que stion.

So the opportun ity is there and there is no urgency as it has been defi ned in the sense of some thing that can be done resulting from the debate, other than satisfy the paltry ego of the Leader of the Op position. The Leader of the Oppo sition has talked about dreams being shattered; that kind of language we do not use. The dream has not been shattered; the matter has been postponed. Al can has said they are continu- 15 June, 1982 ing to di scuss with us. Alcan has said that they realize this is sti ll a prime area for an aluminum sm elter. They have not given up that dream; we have not given up that dream.

Finally, the citatio ns. On page 91 of Be auche sne, Cit ation 285, in brief: "It mu st deal with a matter within the admin istrative com petence of the govern ment and there mu st be no other reasonable opportu nity for debate." It's there in Beauschesne. There's a trad ition with respect to this kind of moti on.

Cit ation 286: "The specific and impo rtant matters requiring urgent consid eration for the di scussion mus t be so pressing that pub lic interest will suf fer if it is not given im med iate attention." On these two criteria, the motion fails and if I needed no other autho rity, the statement of the Presi dent of Alcan, that indeed there is nothing which it can do. What wou ld they have us do, expropria te Alcan? They' ll not move that, nor wou ld we. What would they have us do, say "boo" to Alcan?

We are sti ll in very good relationship with Alcan; that relationsh ip will conti nue despite the attempts of the Op positi on to frus trate that dream; despite the attempts of the Op position to make it appear as if there is some adver sarial position between the government and Alcan when there is none. That is what this motion seems to do. It is not a matter of urgent pub lic impo rtance. It is, like the state of economy generally, a ma tter of public im portance; so are the things we have yet to debate in this House and I ask you to rule accord ingly. SPEAKER'S RULING MR. SPEAKER: Or der please.

I thank both honour able mem bers for speak ing on this moti on. I have read it over and find indeed that Beauchesne does refer, under 285, to the matter being within the ad mini stra tive competence of the government. I sus pect that if there should be un ani mit y of the House, the House would very soon proceed with the debate. If there is a di fference of opinion, as there obviousl y is, the matter will soon come to a vote; in any case then the House will decide. Therefore, I will rule that the motion is out of order. 3310 OR DERS OF THE DAY ADJOURNE D DEBATE ON SECON D RE ADI NG MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Govern ment House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, will you please call the adjo urned debate on Bill No. 21. BIL L 21 -THE COMMUN ITY CHIL D DAY CARE STANDARDS ACT MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Hon ourable Min ister of Communi ty Services, Bill No. 21, standing in the name of the Honour able Memb er for Tuxedo. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I wish to

Tuesday, 15 June, 1982 thank the memb ers on the other side and this side , for their supp ort in risi ng to speak on Bill No. 21, The Communi ty Child Day Care Standards Act. To begin with, I would like to commend the Memb er for Wolseley for the remarks which she made a week ago last Frida y in speaking to this legislation, and indeed, I believe, for the many hours that she had spent in helping to put together this legislation.

I know that this has been a very great personal interest of hers and I'm aware, from many friends who are actively involved in the day care commun ity, ju st how mu ch time she has spent in meeting with various interested groups and constituent groups of the day care com muni ty of Man itoba in an effort to bring to fruition this day care Act for Man itoba.

I believe that many of the remarks that she ma de in addr ess ing the whys and the wherefores of the need for sta ndards for enunciati ng what we believe in, in terms of qual ity day care in this province and how we ought to go about achievi ng it, are all valid and I think that she made an excellent sum mary in her add ress to the Chamb er. On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, I have one major area of dis agreement with her in that I believe that she attempted, by slipping into a great deal of rhetoric, to make day care a partisan issue and I do not see day care as a partisan issue.

I believe that all of us, on both si des of the House, recognize the need for qu ality day care, the need to provide this type of opportun ity so that women and men cannot be prevented from ac hieving thei r career goals, from achieving all of the opportun itie s that are avai lable to them, fulfil ling all of the opportu nities that are avai lable to them in society today because of the need to have their childr en well looked after, given the kind of care, attention and consideration that they deserve, and would indeed have from their parents and family at home, were it not for the necessity on the part of many to seek and util ize the services of day care.

I belie ve that we all agree on that and that's not some thing that's in que stion on eithe r side of the House.

I believe that we all agree that it is absolutely esse ntia l to a society such as ours in Cana da to have high stand ards of qual ity for day care so that we know that we are providing the opportuni ty for all of those men and women, and I recognize that the vast major ity who will be utilizing the servic es, who will of neces sity seek out the services of day care are women, but I believe that all of us recognize that these opportuni ties mu st be provided so that they may fulfil! their legiti mate objectives, goals and desi res as produc tive mem bers of society.

As I say, this is not a partisan issue and the only regret I have about the remark s of the Memb er for Wolseley is that I believe that she, in the latter stages of her speech, defi nitely attem pted to fall into the rhetoric of ma king day care a partisan issue, sayi ng that only those on the New Democ ratic side of the House were really interested in qu ality day care; I know that not to be the case and I was di sap pointed that she fell into that.

However, beca use she di d, I'd ju st like to point out a few of the state me nts she made and show how easily they can mi slead people and how easily, by slipping into that sort of rhetoric, she can take away the major focus of the major objectives of this legislation and the opportun ities that it will provide for thousands of Ma n itobans who wi ll util ize day care in the futur e and I think to the de triment of the objectives of the legis la tion and to the real value of having legislation of this natur e in Man itoba.

The remarks that I ma ke are said in the context of one who has util ized the services of day care in this province for, I belie ve, in one form or another, all fou r of our childr en and also as one who, bPca use of having a numb er of close friends and, in fact family , who are involved in the provision of day care in this provi nce and others, I am well well aware of the objectives of those who are in the ind ustry and of parents seeking to place their childr en in qu ality day care facilities in thi s province.

The memb er referred to, of course, figu res in the Bu dget say ing that the previous government wasn't very interested in day care, and for the fi rst year or two of its term of office it did n't give suf ficient increases to day care and so forth.

Well, of course, those were di fficu lt times and like any government faced with ma ssive deficits we were faced with the prospect of not being able to give many sectors of society the increases which they would prefer to have had. 33 11 The fact of the matter is that under our ju risdic tion, day care rose from a bud getary figur e of slightly over 3 milli on, right up to 9 million in four short years. Cer tainly all of the former New Dem ocratic ad min istra tion did not produce anywhere near that kind of increase in day care funding.

So we were aware of the monetary needs, the fiscal needs of the day care commu nity. We increased the numb ers of spaces that were available drama tically so that we cou ld ind eed provide the spaces for the burgeoning demand out there. I think that the Member for Wolseley will proba bly recognize and admit to the fact that the demand has continued to grow more and more drama tically in recent years than ever before.

In fact, the need for day care and the provision of day care in general has grown drama tic ally over the last nu mber of years, and the fact of the matter is that our government under took to increase the spaces to provide the opportu ni ties in the day care communi ty and, I think, fulfill ed that aspect of things very well. I was a little trou bled with some of the rhetoric that the mem bers sli pped into in attempting to sort of create that atmosph ere of those who want day care and those who don't and tryi ng to separate out classes of people or groups of people.

She told a story which I didn 't see any particu lar relevance to this particular Act and this dis cus sion about a chairman of a board who was making $800,000, and when asked how he can jus tif y that salary responded, well, I have a wife at home too, you know. Well, it se ems to me that it's exactly that type of deb ate that downgrades the im portance and the sign ificance of bring ing in qu ality day care legislation. There's no place in this House or in thi s debate for obtus e references that kind of try and set the stage for class warfare in di scu ssing day care.

Day care is a necessity to people of all wal ks of life, to people of all economic circu mstances. The que stion is, of cou rse, whether or not people can afford to pay for the qu ality day care, and that's al.I that dif ferentiates. Therefore, it's incu mbent upon government to have in addition to standards, in addi tion to a network and a delivery system for quali ty of day care, a system for finan ci ng day care for those who can not thems elves afford to pay for it. That's all part of the total package, but it doesn't break down

into this class needs day care, and this class doesn't People of all walks of life and in all economic circum stances need and desire and are anxious to supp ort quali ty day care in the provi nce. So, I was di sap pointed that the memb er took away from the th rust and the real value of her remarks by slipping into that kind of rhetorical reference that I think has no place in this whole di scu ssion.

In any case, referri ng to the Act and what it repres ents, I say that the mem ber, I know, was a great deal involved in gatheri ng together the material and the references and the information that led to this Act. I know that she has met on many occasions; I know that she has attempted to consult widel y; I know that she's been given many di fferent opini ons and I hope that those opin ions will not be ignored and I hope that she will not narrow her focus so that she is responsive to only certain parts of the overall day care com muni ty.

I would n't probably have even said that except for the kind of rhetoric that she used last week, because it appeared as though she was attempting to hive off certain groups as having more concern and more interest and therefore bei ng more acce ptable to this government in terms of their views on day care, and leave off all of those others who maybe by virtue of economic circu mstanc es are not as cruci ally in need of governme nt supp ort in the obtai ning of qual ity day care for their childr en but, in fact, still need qual ity day care but by virtue of the fact that maybe they aren't in lower economi c circums tances or in amo ngst the group of, shall we say, "pr ofess ionally qual ified peo ple" for whom thi s Act and around whom this Act is going to be structured, that perhaps they should n't be listened to.

I would think that would be .very sad ind eed, because that has the prospect of throwing out the baby with the bath water when we look at provid ing

an Act that will serve the needs of Mani tobans for all time in futur e with respect to day care. IN TR ODUC TION OF GUE STS MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: May I interrupt for a second. If the mem bers would dir ect their attention to the gallery on my left, we have a grou p of 25 student s, of Grade 7 st anding from the Ashern Central High School. These students are under the direction of Mrs. Schwartz and are represented by the Honourable Min ister of Agricu lture. On behalf of all mem bers of the Asse mb ly I wel come you here today. BILL NO. 21 (Cont '

d) MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Tux edo. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, in add ress ing myself specific ally to The Day Care Act, I have to in a variety of ways echo the sentim ents and the thoughts that were exp ressed by the Member for Fort Ga rry yester day. We are happy to see

an Act come into this Legis lature that will standard ize, that will provide for all the ground rules that will set the stage for quali ty day care to be del ivered throughout this province. We are happy to have that situa tion prevail.

What we are un happy abo ut, of cou rse, is the fact 15 June, 1982 that this Act tends to be ju st enabling legisla tion, that ju st enable s the government to set regulations behind closed doors in a Cabine t room, without bei ng able to expose those regu lations and their appropriateness to the people in all the commun ities of Man itoba who require day care and will, indeed , want to have ade qua te day care faci lities to del iver throughout their communi ties. This Act merely says we have tile opportuni ty to set regulations on this, tha t and the other thing.

And although we can all sup port better standards and better quali ty of day care and all agree to the value of day care to society today, we don' t know what we are going to get by virtue of this Act, so I don't know how we can adeq uately debate the pros and cons of this Act.

We can talk about the pitfalls that may be faced, by virtue of struc turing regulations too narrowly, so that people who are in a position and need day care in this provi nce are not exc lud ed from that opportun ity; we can talk about the need to have regulations flexible so that those in rural Mani toba, who today are receiving qua lity day care in many institutions, are not excl ud ed from receiving that in futu re, by virtue of regula tions tha t are too narrowly drafted that will elimi nate them.

The fact of the matter is that di fferent standards exist today in rural Ma nitoba and remote areas than do exist in Winnip eg. The fact of the matter is that even in terms of space requir ement s; even in terms of wash room faci lities; even in terms of structural consider a tions with respect to their plant and their sur round ings, there are slightly different sta ndards in the ru ral and remote areas than there are in Winn ipeg.

It's all well and good for us to set standards, based on what prevails in Winnip eg, but we ma y forget that what is avai lable ma y be fairly read ily and fairly easi ly, in terms of buildings and facili ties in Winn ipeg, is not necessa rily available in rural and remote commu ni ties. If that's the case, is it better to have an adeq ua te facility that does provide qual ity day care, but doesn't qui te meet those rigid standards, or is it better to close them down and have nothing at all?

Those are the concerns we would have with respect to the drafting of those regu lations and the di fficulty is that we will not be a party to those regulations, and I'm not sur e who migh t be a party to those regula tions, because I think there ma y be a great tende ncy on the part of the Memb er for Wolseley to tune in on only one particular group; on one partic ula r special interest group; on one particular high profile active group and tune out on the rest of those in the day care communi ty. 3312 She referred to the fact that this was The Com mun ity Day Care Act and it was very sign ificant she said, except that - I believe in read ing a little bit between the lines - there may be a tendency to have the regulation and the author ity and the whole ad min istra tion of this Act go outside the communi ty and into the hands of a bu reaucracy; a bu reaucr acy that would not be responsive; that would not be flexi ble; a whole grou p out there who are the enforcers. the policemen whose only interest is in making sur e that the "i's" are dotted, the "I's" are crossed, and not interested in the true and ultima te test of qu ality day care, the welfare of the children, the well-being of the childr en who are und er day care.

I believe that there is a possi bility that could exist because of jus t a numb er of little hints of messages

that have come across, either from statements made by the Memb er for Wolsele y or others across the way; or in fact briefs, of which I have copies, of many that have been given to the Mem ber for Wolseley for the Mi nister of Communi ty Services And Corrections to see. I'm concerned that some of them are ignoring the di fferences; ignoring the need for flexib ilty out there in the communi ty; writing their briefs only from a perspective of Winnip eg, where adeq uate faci lities and buildi ngs are bou nd.

You know we have now the situation where, because of declining school enrol ments, there are school building s avai lable; there are public buil di ngs in which we are setting aside space, brand new attractive space where we can set up good qual ity day care institutions. But those are not neces sarily in abu ndance in the rural and remote areas and I'd be concerned that the regulations may not be drafted flexibly enough so that all of Man itoba can benefit from such

an Act. Further, I am concerned, as I know many of our memb ers are, that the author ity and the responsibil ity of the Boards, the Boards of Di rectors of existi ng day care institutions, will be drastically reduced; that they will not take the full and proper part of their responsi bilty that they ought to, in ensuring that qualit y day care is provided in their institutions . They will be side tracked by regulations which put the power in the hands of the bu reaucr acy and out of the hands of the dem ocratically elected boards of day care institutions who, today, are running good esta blishmen ts.

They're made up of parents; they're ma de up of commu nity people; active people who are concerned to provide full qual ity day care in their local commun ities who are going to be si detracked by virtue of the fact that these regulations and the autho rities that will be drafted through the reg ulations, as a result of the enabl ing legislation before us, will in fact result in a poor del ivery of day care in the province if that happens. I wou ld be concerned that those regula tions ought not to be drafted in such a way to allow that to happen.

I know the legisl ation as it exists is probably in this bland form, you might say, that it does not have any strong statements in it because of the fact that the Memb er for Wolseley hasn't necessarily been able to achieve consensus with in her own caucus and I know that she has some very stro ng feelings that would make this legislation very di fficult for many people in the day care commun ity to live with and, therefore, thi s legislation is purposely sile nt on the matter of whether or not private, profit-making institutions can operate within the day care communi ty of Ma nitoba.

It's sil ent on the role of commun ity boards whether or not these commun ity-based day care boards will have any role to play, or auth ority, under the new Act. It's silent on whether or not there shall be a cei ling of fees that can be charged for placi ng people in day care in thi s province and you know, there is a concern. There are some very very good institutions, some very high qual ity day care institutions, that could be elimi nated from existence if the government were to set a ceiling and say nobody shall be able to charge beyond that limi t.

Then you have the elimi nation of the oppor tuni ty for people to enhance their instituti on, or their facility, over and above the minimum standards that are set, because it costs more.

If they want to reduce 15 June, 1982 the child-to-worker ratio down below lim its and have more costs; if the y want to have nurses involved; if they want to have special ized workers in their pro grams and all sorts of thi ngs, that will all cost money and it may well be that you have the situation that exists today in the Health Scienc es Centr e Day Nur sery in which their cost of operation on a per diem bas is is $3.00 or $4.00 per child per day greater than the maxi mum allowable under the cu rrent govern ment sub sidy program.

If you say that there will be no opportun ity for them to pass along those additional charges to the parents, who may well be able to afford them and who may well suppo rt those additional charges because they want greater quali ty day care and greater opportuniti es for their childr en in day care, that will not be possib le if the regulations are drafted in a certain way.

They're sile nt on that, and I'm sur e that they're silent on all those things because it'll all boil down to a battle behind the closed doors of the caucus room of that government over there, or perhaps in Cabine t ulti mately, to decide on whether or not they should elimi nate private operations from day care in Man itoba; whether or not they should put a ceiling on the amoun t that can be charged; whether or not they should elimina te the role of commun ity-based boards on day care institutions and I think all of those things could ha ppen if we are not vigilant.

I know that it's sti ll under consideration and I'll tell you why I know that, because a draft of the proposed regulations is being circu lated by a promin ent group in day care in Mani toba today and, as part of that draft, there's an endor sement which people who are involved in day care operation in this province are asked to sign.

Part I of the endor sement is to say, we endor se these stan dards that are being proposed for the developme nt of day care regulations in Ma nitoba; and

Part 11 of it is, we believe that there should be no more profit-taking day care allowed in Mani toba. 3313 So, at least one of the active groups are obviously solicit ing people's opinions so that they can present them to the Member for Wolseley or the Mi nister or wh oever and put this in to the reg ula tion. -(I nterjecti on)- That's right. Private groups are obviously doing it with encou ragem ent; they would n't be doing it if they did n't know there was a receptive group in government who wou ld respond to this kind of thing.

So, that's the kind of thing that concerns us because, as I've said, day care is not a partisan issue. Qual ity day care is an issue that all of us would sup port and do supp ort. The fact of the matter is, set the standards, set the highest possible standards that all of us can agree on, set the operating sta ndards; set the physical sta nd ards.

Tell people what is requir ed, even in terms of programming - and I'll speak a little more about pro gram ming after- tell people what they have to achieve and let them go and achieve it, but don't badger them; don't say you can't do it if you're a profit-making insti tution; don't say that we don't care what the board wants, we've got coordi nators and su pervisors and other sorts of bu reaucratic types who are going to tell you how to del iver it and what to do and are going to check on you and police you and all of that.

Do it in a way that all of us can supp ort with as mu ch commun ity inpu t as possible and beari ng in mind the dif feri ng

Tuesday, 15 June, 1982 needs of all of the di ffering commun ities of Ma nitoba; that's what you need for qu ality day care in Manit oba. What else is going to be in these regulations? Are we going to have in those regulations the fact that you shall not allow the childr en to watch television as part of your program; that you shall provide for them X nu mber of types of toys and play thi ngs and this struc tu re? See, this is where you get into the dif ficultie s in di fferent areas; di fferent areas have di fferent resour ces to call upon.

In Winnip eg, they might perhaps be able to take them on a tour of the fire hall or a tour of Bunsma ster, or a tour of this facil ity, or McDonalds, or that facility; they have so many more things at their di sposal for programmin g to keep the childr en's mi nds active in doing these thi ngs. See, the Memb er for Wolseley ind icated what her biases are when she kept referring to kids being stuck down in a base ment watching television. Well, if you'r e going to di sallow any televi sion whatsoever, or any passive activity, then I say to you, that's a problem that many day care institut ions will have.

As a parent, I can recall when our childr en were progr amm ed into Yamaha and into gymn astics and all of those things, some time s they get overpro grammed at an early age and they become so hyper that it's a problem to deal with. So the fact of the matter is we have to be reasonable, we have to be flexi ble. We can' t take these strong stands that say, you know watching television is out ; we've got to be more reasonable about the types of programming and del ivery systems in day care that we offer.

I think that that's a danger, by leaving every thing to the regula tions, by be ing silent on all of these issues, yet talking about them in the Legislatur e as you introd uce the legislation. I think that there could be a very very serious problem deve lop that would disallo w many of the qu ality day care operations in this province today from mee ting the rules. I think that there is a good argu ment to be ma de for mai ntai ning the com muni ty board system as part of the central network of del ivery of day care.

You know, the parallel is that we, und er our educ ation system, allow the final decisi on-making to be made at the communi ty level by the school boards. We set the standards; we set the regulations and then we say to the boards, you ensur e that you'r e happy with the final del ivery because you 're closest to the communi ty, to the children, you hire the people and, as long as you live within these gui delines, then we're happy with it.

Well, I think that there's a parallel that can and should be drawn for keeping communi ty boards closely involved in the operation of these day care centres and I would be very sorry to see this govern ment, beh ind closed Cabine t or Caucus doors, pass regulations that would elimi nate that opportu nity in Mani toba today. I ju st place it as a ca ution because we're talking in a vacu um. This is a very general bill; it has nothing specific.

It enable s the government to pass regulations to do anything and I'm cau tion ing the government that those regulations ought not to prevent people, who are today providing good sta ndards of day care and will continue to provide good sta nda rds, meet all of the regu lation standards and qual ity performa nces requi red by the government. So, let's not, by virtue of very narrow and stringent gu ideli nes, elimi nate them from the market. I also know, Mr . Speaker, that there are many di ffer ent ways that childr en can and should be looked after in Man itoba, preschool children in futu re.

Let's not say that this Act dic tates the only way because there are people who work on shifts and they may not have day care facil ities ava ilable to them. The Memb er for Fort Ga rry referred to day care in the workplace and how that is going to be more and mor e a part, and very rightly so, of day care in the futu re.

So that people, through their place of emp loyment, will have a day care institution avai lable to them and maybe many of them who have people on shifts will provide evening day care or whatever is necessary under the circu m stances, at different hours, because I know that many people are restricted from the types of empl oyment they can have by virtue of the hours of day care that are avai lable to them.

Forth em it may be more oppor tuni ty to allow for a homemaker situation or to allow for tax breaks or sub sid ies, or any of those kinds of options and I would hope that this Act is not seen as the be-all and the end-all and the only solution that is available to people who need to have their childr en adequately looked after in Man itoba in futu re. The other concern, of cou rse, I would have is as to the qu alifications that have to be met by those who will work in day care in futu re in Mani toba.

I know they've sugge sted as a model, utilizing the diploma course at Red Riv er, and that's a good starting point. But the fact of the ma tter is that there are many others who are providing quali ty day care, who are giving due care and attention and the kinds of tender loving care that we would all like to have our chi ldren get today and may not be able to meet those paper quali fications.

I would hope that there would be ample opportun ities for them to be brought in through a grand mother or grandfather clause, so to speak - grandp arent claus e - so that they can be brought into the whole day care communi ty under this new Act. I would hope that literally hundreds of people are not thrown out because they can not achieve the paper qual ifications, even though they are acknowledged to have been provid ing qual ity day care up to thi s point in Mani toba.

And again, it's up to the regulations and I would hope that those regu lations will be drafted with some care and some reason, bearing in mind the di fferent needs of all the people throughout Mani toba. 3314 So th ose are all concerns that we would have and members opposite are chuc kling sayi ng, oh that can't happen. But again there are different resou rces and di fferent opportun ities avai lable to people in the prov ince and I happen to know that they're offering sub jects under the Day Care Program at Red Ri ver Com muni ty College on an extension basis to various commun ities throughout the province.

But in some of the com muni ties that are reasonably close to Win nipeg, their workers or their people who need to upgrade themselves perhaps in order to meet the standards that are going to be set by the government, will not necessarily be able to come into Winn ipeg to take the cou rses. How are you going to handle that? Or they may have very little flexibi lity in their oppor tun ities to take cou rses that you ma ke available to them at a communi ty college or a regional school or so on. These are all more di fficult for people in the rural communi ties than they are for people in Win-

15 June, 1982 nipeg and we don't always tend to remember that. We tend to take all of the resou rces that we have available to us; we have two un iversities; we have a commu nity college; we have regional secondary schools and so on, we sort of forget about that when we try and apply that to a remote com muni ty such as Chur chill. So are we better off to be a little more flexible in allowing those people to achieve their sta ndards, or in recognizing the sta ndards that they have by virtue of their experienc e in the field?

Or are we better off to jus t say, well, I'm sorry you don' t meet the standa rds, you 'll have to close down your operation? Ob viously we're not better off to do that and I would hope that this governme mt, in its zealous desire to respond to special interest groups and particular pressure groups, doesn't throw out the opportun ity for others in the province to provide day care. So, I say in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, that obviously this bill, because it represents a move to standa rdize to impr ove the quali ty of day care in this provi nce, is some thing that in general we can supp ort.

But without knowing what the specifics of the regu lations are, we're in a quan dary as to know jus t exactly what the government has in mind in terms of its bottom-l ine posit ion on so many issue s that are caught up in this network of ideas and concerns. We leave as our bottom-line position to the Memb er for Wols eley, the Mi nister of Com muni ty Services and the government: remem ber the needs of the childr en and the parents in wha tever you 're doing in this. It's not ju st those peo ple who are special interest groups who have the lobbying power with your government that you have to consider.

There should be as mu ch variety and flexibili ty of opportunity for the various modes of del ivery. Qual ity day care sta ndards we all sup port but for heaven sake, don't strangle you rself in the regulations so that you elimi nate fine day care operations from this province by virtue of the regula tions that you draft. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Springfield. MR. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, I jus t had a couple of qu estions for the Memb er for Ri ver Heig hts if he has sufficient time and is willing to yield to a couple of qu estions. Mr .

Speaker, the memb er talked -(lnterjec tion) well, thi s relates to the principle of the bill for the Memb er for Rh ineland, so I want to get an apprecia tion for the natur e of his argu ment.

I got the im pres sion the Memb er for Tu xedo agreed with the principle of the bill, in terms of provid ing the sta ndards, yet I wasn't clear on how he felt his argu ment was ju stified in sug gesting that we should have that kind of flexibil ity, particula rly in rural commun ities where the level of servic es is not as high as he and I would both agree they should be and yet, he also sugge sts that we should provide some very hard and fast gu ideli nes.

I'm not sur e I qui te un derstand how we can both have the gui deli nes and have the fle xibili ty the memb er wants without providing for it to be done by regulation. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before we proceed, is it the will of the Hous e to allow these que stions to be asked? Is it agreed? (Agreed) The Honourable Memb er for Tux edo. MR. G. FIL MON: Well, Mr.

Speaker, obviously there are certain areas in which one has to be very rigid about one 's standa rds, in terms of what's the bottom line position you'll accept and there are other areas in which you can be flexi ble and acknowledge the di ffer ent opportun ities for deliv ery of the services that you migh t have in a major ur ban centre versus a small remote centre. I say that the bottom line is a good quali ty day care. Are the childr en getting the kind of care and attention and love that they need and sti mu lation that they need?

Let's not be so rigid as to get hung up on paper qu alifica tions; on whether or not somebody is private institution or not; on whether or not you have X- nu mber of squ are feet per child or Y-n umb er of squa re feet, you have to have a bottom line, But when you get to that bottom line, make sur e that the rural areas and the remote areas can live with it before you pass it. eMR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Springfield. MR. A. ANSTETT: Mr . Speaker, I would lik e to speak to the bill then briefly in view of the mem ber's response. Mr .

Speaker, I have some concerns because I think what we're faced with here is a bill that the Op position actually really likes. In view of the memb er's response to my que stion, I find that he can only look for contradic tions in the bill, when really what he's saying and he said earl ier in his remarks, was that he wanted high sta nda rds. That's what he was talking about in terms of day care; he talked about the very need for high sta ndards. As soon as I asked him that qu esti on, Mr . Speaker, he started talking about the bottom line to accomoda te the rural areas and those with less services. 3315 So, Mr .

Speaker, our problem here is that the Opp o sition, because of their role to criticize, has not been willing to recognize what a comm endable piece of legis lation this is, and althoug h they've compli mented the Memb er for Wolseley, have not gone near as far as I think they'd really like to, because I think they believe that the le gislation is mu ch better than they're pre pared to say in this House.

I think if we're going to have constructive criticism at comm ittee level per haps we should agree that the principle of the legisla tion and the way it's been brought in by the Min ister, is exactly the way the memb er thinks it should have been for two reasons: (1) because he wants stan dards and he wants high sta ndards and he said so; (2) because both the Memb er for Fort Ga rry and himself want to see the flexibil ity that I want in terms of those areas that requir e di ffering treatments. So, Mr. Speaker, he's made those argum ents and made them well.

But he's made them as a method of criticizing the bill when this is exactly what the bill provides. Mr . Speaker, I take his comment s today to be very compli mentary to the Min ister and the Memb er for Wolseley, even though he wasn't prepared to put it in that light. I sug gest to you, Mr. Spea ker, that his criticisms, as I sug gested from my seat, were like building 100 straw men to protect 100 acres of corn, because that's exactly what he's done. Those kinds of

Tuesday, 15 June, 1982 scarecrows don't work. If you'r e going to go into comm ittee we've got to come up with constructive su ggestions about how to im prove the bill. One point I think he ma kes that has some value is the que stion of the communi ty day care boards, in terms of how we're going to keep the communi ty involved in regulati ng each of the areas that are going to be governed und er this bill. I think it's imp ortant that each day care centre have that flexibi lity and that local commu nity standar ds have some input. I think the memb er can contrib ute there. Mr .

Speaker , I wasn't planning on speak ing to this bill in the beginning but after listening to the mem ber's remarks, I have a concern abou t another area. That is, he sugge sts that by some subterfuge - he did n't use that word but he certainly sugge sted it was going to be behind doors; it was some thing that was in some way less than proper because some private organization is out conduc ting a su rvey - that the Memb er for Wolse ley, the Min ister, ca ucus and Cabine t were going to be planning to do certain thi ngs. Mr .

Speaker, there's no legisla tion in this province that provides very specific permission for private schools. There's no legislation in this province that says private schools mu st char ge tuitions no higher than. There's no author ity for us to enact suc h regulations because there's no legislation under which they could be enacted. Mr. Speaker, there's no such author ity in this Act and yet the Memb er for Tux edo makes the allegation that this government and this caucus would be prepared to do those kinds of things. I have to challenge the mem ber.

Show us where that author ity is, because if that author ity is not in these bills - it certainly isn' t in The Publi c Schools Act and it certainly isn't in this day care bill - then, Mr. Speaker, what the member alleges is patently im possi ble and therefore patently absurd. So, Mr . Speaker , let's not talk abou t ceili ngs; let's not talk about elim inati ng private day care programs, because if that were to be done it wou ld be in the Act. There may be some who think that's desirable; I haven't heard the memb er say whether that's desi ra ble or not. But it's not in the bill; there's no author ity to do it.

So, Mr. Speaker , when we talk about those kinds of concerns, let's talk about what's in the bill. There's no provision for the kinds of action the memb er sug gests wou ld be possi ble unless it's specifica lly in there. Any regu lations to that effect would be beyond the author ity of the bill and beyond the author ity to Cabi net to impl ement . So let's talk abou t the meat of the bill. I detect a real sense of approval that the Mi nister's conceal ing in these straw-man criticisms. I sugge st, Mr. Speaker, that doesn't serve our pu rpose.

Let's get down to clause-by-clause and move this bill on to Second Read ing. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Robli n-Russ ell. MR. W. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker , I move, seconded by the Honour able Memb er for Arthur that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Com muni ty Servic es on a point of order. HON. L. EVANS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Have you ascertained whether anyone else wou ld like to speak in the debate? BILL NO. 23 -A N ACT TO AMEND THE LEGAL AID SERVICES SOCI ETY OF MANITOBA ACT MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Govern ment House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, Mr . Deput y Speaker. Would you please call the adjo urned debate on Bill No. 23? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney-Gen eral, Bi ll No. 23. MR. R. BANMAN: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Mr. Deput y Speaker, I would like to speak on this bill if there are no objections at this particular time. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: As long as it is clearly understood that I just stood it. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: With the understan ding that the bill will sta nd in the name of the Honourable Leader of the Op position. The Honourable Memb er for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr . Deput y Speaker. moved at this time to speak on Bill No. 23, which is

an Act to amend The Legal Aid Services Society of Mani toba Act, for two reasons. One is to echo my sup port for the bill personally; I think it's badly needed here in Man itoba. The second is to respond to some of the concerns exp ressed by the Me mb er for Virden when he last spoke on this particular bill on Wednesday, 2nd June, 1982. 3316 Now in general, Mr . Speaker, as the Attorney Gen eral pointed out when he ma de his opening rem arks, thi s bill has tlJ\o basic fu nctions.

The fi rst func tion is to allow the Legal Aid Society to give legal aid assistance to groups who are condu cti ng legal action in regard to matters of public concern. I men tion specifica lly our consumer and environmen tal groups. That's the first part of it, Mr. Speaker. The seco nd is to introd uce a nu mber of what are basic ally housekeep ing items in regard to the lan guage used in the exis ting Legal Aid Services Society of Ma nitoba Act, in particular those housekeeping changes relate to the use of mascu line language.

So in other words, what they're tryi ng to do is remove any sexist bias, I guess is the proper term, from the Act as it exists now. Now I'd like to addr ess myself to both of these par ticular principles today. Looking at the first point, the

15 June, 1982 provisions of the bill which would allow for full or partial legal aid to groups, I would point out to the Memb er for Virden and to other memb ers of this House, that perhaps there's been some mi su nder standing of the basic principle involved with thi s new amendment. Now first of all, it's a principle that has been raised in the past, as the Attorney-General pointed out, so it's not exactly a new problem. The fact is though, that by allowing groups to receive assistance from Legal Aid und er this Act, we will not be in any way viol ating the exis ting prin ciple of legal aid assistanc e. I would refer in this regard to the proposed Clau se No. 10.1

(2) Elig ibili ty of Gr oups, in which it points out specifically that a grou p submi tti ng an appli cat ion for Legal Aid under

Section 3.1 may be fou nd eligible by the society, not withst anding that the memb ers of the group or some of them would not be eligible as individuals if the society in its absolute dis cretion deter mi nes (

a) that the income s of the memb ers generally are at such a level that payment by the grou p of the legal costs in respect to which the application is subm itted would work a serious hardship upon the group and would seri ously hamper its activi ties; or (

b) that the group does not have suf ficient funds to pay the legal costs in respect of which the application is subm itted. So it respects the general principle that legal aid should go to those in society who can not afford legal assistance otherwise. But it does not preclud e, as the Memb er for Virden sug gested, the possibili ty that such groups mi ght have individua ls as part of that group who would not thems elves be eligible for Legal Aid. So that particular concern, I think, of the Memb er for Virden in reading the Act, is not particular ly valid.

No w the real que stion is the general principl e of providing legal aid to groups and in particu lar, provid ing legal aid to groups in consu mer envi ronmental issue s. I, perso nally, have no objection to that princi ple, Mr .

Speaker, because in the past in a nu mb er of cases, we've seen that there is a great im balanc e in society on such issues when certain organizat ions, certain corporations perhaps, are seeking certain changes and when you have that group, which is well able to afford Legal Aid or legal assistance on the one hand, up agains t neighborhood groups suc h as the Attorney-General mentioned, a group such as the McGr egor Overpass group or groups which are con cerned abou t the environmental im pact of these pro posed chan ges who can not themselves afford legal assistance.

I think this bill seeks to remedy that, seeks to bal ance the forces, Mr. Speaker, seeks to give these groups a chanc e to put forward their case because as mem bers of this House know, today one's legal assis tance often det erm ines the degree to which one is heard in thi s society. It's unf ortuna te but true, that with the increasing comple xi ty of society and the increas ing nu mber of rules, regulations, laws, you name-it, that the assistance of lawyers is badly needed. I think thi s ensur es that such consumer and environ mental groups get a chance at a fair hearing.

Now I would point out that the amend ments to the Act do not provide for full legal aid to all groups.

Section 3.1 (3) says that the society may furnish Legal Aid to a group under Subsec tion 1, either without charge or with a partial charge, as the society may determine. In regard to providing legal aid with a par tial charge, it shall also determine the amount of the group's contri bution to the costs of Legal Aid. So where a group ma y be able to afford a certain contri bution but not the entir e cost of the legal assistance they need, there is provision under this amendm ent that they receive partial assistance. That is the fi rst basic goal of these amend ments, Mr.

Speaker, and as I have pointed out, I think the con cerns of the Memb er for Virden are perhaps not exactly the case if one looks at the entire bill itself, the entir e portions of Bill 23, because some of the con cerns he made are met within the bill. That's the first part of it. The second

part is in regard to the housekeeping measures, in particular, to the portions of Bill 23 which change male termi nology to more neutral, what we'd call I sup pose, nonsexist language. The Attorney Ge neral has pointed out that this is not the only bill in which we hope to see this as the government; we hope to expand this general principle to other exis ting Acts, in fact, all Acts of the province eventu ally because it's a matter of keeping up with the times, Mr. Speaker. You know, I've sat here for a numb er of months and I've noticed that certain mem bers of this Hous e have objection to these terms.

Well, perhaps I can under sta nd that. When one is used to a certain kind of termin ology, it's often di fficu lt to adapt to new ones. I would note in this regard the objection the Leader of the Oppo sition often makes to the use of the word 'chai rperson' and he's qu ite vocal in his objections to that. But as I've said, Mr. Speaker, it's a matter of keeping up with the ti mes. 3317 Ten years ago, the use of the word 'chai rperson' was a rather novel one, it was a rather new idea.

But today it's accepted by most people in society as a reflection of the fact that the previous term did have an imp lied di scrimi nation agains t women and the use of the term 'chair woman' does not really overcome that, so really the key thing is to try and use a neutral term. I say this, Mr . Speaker, as one who at time s often slip s into the use of the word 'chairman' from my own experience so I'm certainly not lecturing mem bers on the use of this word. I'm suggesting that perhaps we should all try to use it a bit more often.

But that really is up to the ind ividual conscienc e, the indi vidual choice of the member s of this House, of any memb er of society, they can say what they want to, Mr . Speaker. But in the laws of the province, I think it's absol utely vital that we reflect the changing times; we reflect the desir e of many people in society to elimi nate terms which are biased towards male terms, Mr. Speaker. I think we should do it not ju st in Bill 23, as the Attorney-General sugge sted, but in all bills in thi s province and they're not major cha nges at all, Mr . Speaker.

I ju st invite some of the mem bers of this House to look at some of the terms, you know, replac ing references to "h e" and "him," Subsec tion 13 (2), for exam ple, you can check with that, whether we're changing the reference to, "whe ther or not that other solicitor is practising associ ation with him." Well, you know, Mr . Speaker, as I've said, that's keeping up with the times. If it's not a ma tter of keep ing up with the use of termi nology, it's perhaps recog nition of the fact that there are increasing numb ers of female lawyers nowadays. In fact, if one looks at the

numb er of law students entering say fi rst year, looks at the numb er entering this in the past few years as com pared to may be 5 or 1 O years ago, one will find that the numb er of female law students has increased rather dramatical ly. At one time the percentage was 10 or 20 percent; a female law student was rather uni que. Today, I believe the percentage is approxi mately 50 percent - and the Attorney-General who is a former professor of law can perhaps advise me on that - but my feedback is that has now reached that level. So what we're talking about, Mr. Speaker, is a growing numb er of lawyers who will indeed be women and to use terms in

an Act of this province which refer to 'him' as somehow being the only solicitors that are envisi oned in this Act are male , I think, is merely stic king one's. head in the sand. Because with that numb er of female law stude nts comin g up through the ranks, in a couple of years all the new practising lawyers will be perhaps 50 percent female and once they work their way through the ran ks, perhaps the whole profession will reflect the 50 percent or 51 percent, I sup pose, level of the population that women now make up. There are two basic princi ples in conclusion then, Mr.

Speaker, in this Act: (1) of providing assistance to consu mer environmental groups; (2) of changing male termi nology to more neut ral term inology. I have no problems with either. I think it's a reflection of the time s in both cases and I would urge all mem bers of this House to perhaps review what objections they might have to this bill by actually read ing the bill and talking to those who drafted it. I think if they do check into it, they'll find that there really aren't that many problems with the bill and that we should, in fact, as a Hous e unani mously supp ort Bill No. 23. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Mini ster of Communi ty Services. HON. L. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to partici pate in the debate briefly inasmuch as (Interjec tion)- 20 min utes - it does present to this House, perhaps for some mem bers a rather novel approach but as my colleague, the Memb er for Thom pson ind icated, nevertheless an appr oach that is appropriate for the times; an approach that recog nizes that more and more there is a need and a requir ement to assist groups in our socie ty in group action before various governmental boards, Publi c Utility Boards, for exam ple, in order to assist these groups in whatever way to cope with the problems that they perceive.

And in this day and age, particu larly when we're tal king abou t matters that go before the Pu blic Ut ility Board. we're talking about, in many instances, very technical matters; matters that have to be resea rched; matters that have to have caref ul pres entation and I think it's very fitting that the Attorney General, at this point in time, does bring in

an Act which amends The Legal Aid Services Society of Ma nitoba Act so that it now, upon passage in futu re, will be able to assist various groups. Without qu esti on, Mr. Speaker, this legisla tion will serve the cause of consumer interests very well. The consu mers in Mani toba, the consu mers in Canada very often find thems elves very frustrated and very helpless in decisions made by large corporations, par ticu larly corporations that ma y be descri bed as 15 June, 1982 monopolistic, such as, Greater Winnip eg Gas or the Telephone System or the Man itoba Hydr o or, indeed , a transit system - a bus system.

I can give you an example within my constituenc y, Mr . Speaker, of a cu rrent problem that is causing a great deal of frustra tion, a great deal of concern on the part of many, many thousands of citizens in the City of Brandon. I can say those numb ers because there have been petitions to the Cit y Council and it's public information with regard to the numb ers of people who have sig ned petitions; with the numb ers of people who have attended council meetings and that is with regard to the proposal by the City Transit System (

a) to increase the transit rates, and (

b) to seriously cut back the level of service to citizens in parts of the Cit y of Brandon. These people have come to me as their ML A and exp ressed their frustra tion, their concern, their inabil ity to communic ate their concerns to the council, but fortu nately they have another avenue and tha t is to appear before the Pub lic Uti lities Board, if the y so choose. If the Ci ty Council deci des not to hear their appeal - or rather to act upon their appeal - and decide s to carry out the se drastic cutb acks, these massive cutbacks are going to affect many people in a very, very negative way.

I can give you some exa mples of that. I'm told, in one instance, a young woman who is sup porting a small child and wants to work, doesn't want to be on welfare, wants to work, will have to take another tour hours in her day in order to be able to take the child to a day care centre from her home and then go from that day care centre to her place of work. Now with the new

schedule bei ng proposed, the cut back schedu le, there's no way that young mother , that you ng woman can possibly get her child to the day care centre, get herself to work and, of cou rse, pick up the child in the evening and go home without spend ing four hours mainly waiting for buses because of this proposed cutback. Now the avenue is open, of cou rse, for them to go to the Public Ut ilit ies Board because the Ci ty Transit System mu st go to the Pub lic Ut ilities Board, as I understand it, for approval of this finally.

Of cou rse, the Board is the re to adjud icate in its wisdom; we've got some good people on the board; qual ified people who have served this province for a long time and, although there is a new Chair man of the Public Ut ili ties Board, nevertheless we all recognize his many years of di sti nqui shed service and his abil ities. But no matter how well the Board is in its abil ity to make jud gment and so on, these ju dg ments and decisions are based upon facts presented.

I su ggest to you that the group in Br andon of ma ny well-me aning citizens are going to have to take time and spend some money to try to make a presentation before the Public Ut ilities Board if they can ma nage it, because these hearings may be held outside of the city; we're not sur e at thi s point.

But it would seem to me that their cause, the cause of the consu mers of that publi c transi t system will be well served by this kind of legislation because this legislation then would enable that grou p to go to the Legal Aid Services Society of Man itoba and point out the need for legal assistance, the assistance of profess ional lawyer or lawyers in order to help present their case to this Public Utilities Board. So I say here is a cu rrent, vital example where this 3318

legislation will help to ensur e that the consu mers involved in this transit cutback proposal at least will be heard and will not only be heard, but will have their case presented carefull y and logically and in a way that will make the greatest im press ion on the mem bers of the Board who will have to make the final decision. Before you make any careful presentation, of cou rse, Mr. Speaker, there's always the need to have caref ul research and a ma tter of getting the technical data together is another matter that's equal ly im portant.

So I think this is a role that Legal Aid Man itoba can very, very well play and will be apprecia ted by these groups. I use the Brandon Transit System but the same is true for, let's say, a rate hearing by Greater Winnip eg Ga s, or any of the other uti litie s that have this monop oly power, as I said earlier, and very often the detail that goes into rate making, and adj ustm ents of rate, is jus t so im me nse and complic ated that it is very di ffi cult for the average citizen, the average consu mer to be able to garner the facts and to ma ke the case. There's always the exce ption, of course, Mr.

Speaker, there are always some people who are willing to volu nteer their professional advice, or professional service, which is fine , but I sug gest that this perhaps is more the exception than the rule. I sup pose one could argue that we shou ldn't use taxpayers' monies for an advocacy role, or for financ ing of advocacy groups, because this legislation does provide for that. I wou ld su ggest that there are many examp les where thi s Legisla tu re. over the years, has voted monies to varies department s who in turn have funded groups for an advocacy role.

I go back over some years, and I think of the Nelson Agency. The Nels on Agency, some member s of the House ma y not recall, was an advocacy agency estab lished, either by the Roblin or the Weir Government, I'm not sur e which, but it goes back obviously ma ny years into the 1960s and the role of that grou p was to advocate the cause of the people who ma y be adversely affected by the flooding of South Indian Lake.

You recall, with the proposed di version, whether it be a high level or a low level di version, there was no que stion that people in the north were to be affected and some of them would be affected adversely. The government in its wisdom, and I do not fault th ose previous governments, or that previous governm ent, in fact, I give them credit for that, that they saw fit to esta blish this agency which did advocate, on behalf of the people living in those local communi ties, those remote commun ities in northern Mani toba.

Today, in my own department of Com muni ty Servi ces and Corrections, we have a numb er of associa tions, groups that you could classify as advocacy grou ps, that are fu nded by the taxpayers. They are in my Es tima tes, but they were in the Estima tes of pre vious Min isters as well.

The Citi zen Advocacy in Win nipeg is one such group; the y happen to advocate the cause of mainl y handic apped people, both physicall y and mentally handic apped people, and they do an excellent job, a one-on-one job, but they neverthe less play an advocate role as is ultima tely being referred to in Bill 23 which we have before us.

Another organ izati on, Canadian Association for Mental Retarda tion, CMR, is financed in part by the taxpayers in Man itoba and, as many people have known and have experienced, this indeed is also an 15 June, 1982 advocacy group, advocacy advoca ting a particular cause, a particu lar point of view. So the precedent is well established, Mr. Sp eaker, for the Legisla ture to vote monies to fund advocacy groups, to vote monies to set up organizations that can play an advocate role.

I say this is fit and proper; I say that the funding and the assistance of advocate groups, as is being provided for in this bill, is fit and proper in this day and age that we live in, the latter part of the 20th century, because we are living in a very comple x society.

We're living in a society where deci sions are ma de in a very remote fash ion; where we have big organizati ons, big corporat ions. big Crown companie s; where we have large government depar t ments, big government; and where the average Man itoban or the average Canadian, or indeed the average citizen, feels very frus trated and helpless, feels an inabili ty to do some thing about whatever is happen ing, whether it's flood ing out his or her com muni ty; whether it is lack of adeq uate fac ilities for the physi cally handicapp ed and trying to get through the Ci ty Hall or the Town Hall to get some action on behalf of them; or whether it is, as in the exam ple that I used earlier, to get through to the decision- makers with regard to an increase in gas rates or telephone rates or hydro rates or bus fare changes or bus route changes. 3319 So, I think that what we're doing her e is some thing that will be well received by the people of the province.

I think it will be well received certainly by a numb er of organizations that I have come in contact with and I know for a fact, Mr. Speaker, that if this bill had already been enacted last year, or at some previous time, I can ass ure you that mem bers of this organiza tion in my constituenc y, that our ordin ary citizens, housewives, you ng mothers, people who want to do someth ing about this drastic cutback in the Brandon bus system service and feel as frustrated as all get out.

They come to their MLA and I have to explain to them that although we, as a Government of Man itoba do provide sub sidy to urban transit systems, it is not our dir ect responsibil ity to run those systems. It is essen tially a responsibili ty of the muni cipal government and tha t they in turn should approach their council lors, their aldermen or go to the council meetings and ma ke their views known and I've certainly encou raged them to do that and to do whatever else they feel fit and proper in order to mold public opinion, in order to affect the opinion-m akers on city council.

Indeed , they have been writing letters to the editor; they've had news conferences; they've had petitions ; they've had hu ndreds and hundreds of name s on these peti tions and they've gone down to the Ci ty Hall in Bran don with the petitions, but thus far, at least the latest information I have, without suc cess. But I think, and I'm not so sur e whether up to that stage that I des cri bed in this one particular example, that you wou ld necessarily have need for legal aid. I'm not sug gesti ng in all those steps that you have need for legal aid.

What I am su ggesting though is when you go beyond the politic al level. When you go to a technical board, to the Public Uti lities Board as in this case, where there is a need for legal assistance, it's at that stage that this bill will certainly be of assistance. I on

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-76
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 76.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	673a2f47730bb0b3e810f248da66c3a369cff3b5

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