Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 22B (31st Legislature, 4th Session)

31-4-22b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA Friday , 21 March , 1980 Time: 2:3 0 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUP PLY HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris MacGre gor (V irden ): I call the Commit tee to order . We are on Resolution 87 : 8.(

b) the Member for Churchi ll. MR . JAY COWAN: Yes, right before the break , Mr. Chairper son , we had asked about Autopac . I do plan to do a bit of travelling on the roads yet , if I can break away from here for enough time , so I am particularly concerned now to see if the Minister had opportunity to find out if Autopac does cover people on the roads after the road has been officially closed . MR . CHAIRM AN: The Honourable Ministe r . HON. DON ORCHARD (P embina ): No , I di dn 't yet , I am sorry . MR .

COWA N: Okay ; if wi thin the next litt le whi le , before I get on the roads , he can give me that information ••• MR . ORCHA RD : Are you leaving this weekend? MR . COWAN: I was planning on it , but I. MR . COWAN : Thank you , Mr. Chairpe rson . Just one brie f question . MR . ORCHA RD: Mr. Chairman, if I might , if you wanted to phone Autopac this afternoon I think that would probably be just about as quick as me doing it, if you would please? MR . COWAN: Okay . Thanks ; I thank the Minister for that advice and that 's what I will do.

The final questi on, or at least I think the final quest ion that I wanted to ask, was the Minister had indicated be fore that , I believe , they don 't have any record of flying time in regard to inspections . Does that infer that they just don •t have that record available to them or that no record has been kept of the amount of flying time that has been used in inspecting the winter road syste m? MR . ORCHA RD: Well, the record of flights will be logged with the Air Services but it hasn 't been broken out specifically into winter roads and compi led . MR . COWA N: The reason I ask, Mr.

Chairpe rson , I recall that one of my first introductions to this particular Esti mates Committe e was the Minister at that time , which was a di fferent Min iste r , was discussing what he considered to be the excessive use of air time in inspecting winter roads and had indicated that his dep artment under his ju risdicti on was going to reduce that substant ially , and I think we should have an opp ortunity now , and I would just ask the Minister to forward it to us at some time in the near future to have the record of the flying time so as we can make the proper comparis ons , as it was an item that was brought forward by the previous Ministe r in this dep artment .

MR . CHAIRMAN: 8. (b)- -pass ; 8. (c)- -pass ; 8. (d) --pass - the Member for The Pas. - 1411 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . RON McBRYD E: Yes, Mr. Chairper son , I would like some detailed break down of what this entails and why the dramatic change in the amounts . MR .

ORCHA RD: In 8. (d) , the major source of change between this year and last are an increase in ai rport improvements of about $916 ,000 ; an increase in res ource roads of $800 ,000 ; an increase in community roads of $1,783,0 00 ; a de crease in community airports of $664 ,000; an absolute increase of $250 ,000 on ferry landings, from zero last year to $250 ,OOO this year; and a decrease in Airpqrt Maintenance Equipment from $13 2, OOO last year to zero this year ; for a total of $6 , 065, OOO this year compared to $3, 216 , 600 last year , both figures of which had the 15 percent Transfer to the Enabling Vote deducted to net out this year to $5 ,155,3 00 .00.

MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for The Pas . MR . McBRY DE : Mr. Chairperso n, I wonder if the Minister could give us a detailed breakdown of last year 's expenditures and exactly what resource roads , espec ially , were done , commu nity roads were done last year on this secti on, and then, Mr. Chairman, an indication of what is going to be done for this fiscal year under this

section . MR . ORCHA RD: Could I give the member this year 's program firs t . The $924 million on ai rport improvem ents , which represents about an $816 ,000 increase over last year , is broken down into basically improvement work on eleven airpo rts . They range from a ma jor expenditure at Ste. Theresa Point of $250 ,OOO involving terminal reservation equipment shelter , regrading , gravel and consolidation, to a low of Shamat tawa and Brochet both spending $2 ,000 this year for the construction of an outdoor comfort station. MR . McBRY DE: Mr. Chairper son, the Minister said $924 million . Did he mean ? MR .

ORCHARD : No , no, $924 ,000 , I' m sorry ; we don't have quite that much money . MR . McBRY DE: Okay , Mr. Chairman, that 's the Airport part of it . MR . ORCHA RD: Under the Resource Roads , we have $2 .5 milli on this year com pared to the $1 . 7 million last year , and this provides for the two-year project funding on the Jenpeg , Norway Hous e, Cross Lake Road . That 's $2 .5 million flowing into that this year . MR . McBRYD E: Mr. Chairper son, I ju st want to make sure I have this correct . Under this

section of the Manitoba Northlands Agreement, there 's $2 . 5 million and 100 percent of that $2 .5 million will be on the Cross Lake Road? MR . ORCHA RD: That 's correc t. MR . McBRYDE: Mr. Chairper son , I' m not clear on the Resource Road

Section , how they differentiate between a resource road and a regular road, or how that decision is arrived at and why we have a separate item for this road , which explains why I guess it didn 't appear on the Minister 's blue sheets . MR. ORCHA RD: Whether this is the correct explanation or not , the resource road is one which would primar ily service a community destin ation , rather than something like through traffic . Now, whether that is the total explanation , that road probably won 't be numbered for a number of years and come into the , for instance, as a PR . MR . McBRYD E: Mr .

Chairperson , on Item No . 6. (c ), which is the same agree ment on the same road program as the Minister where he shows , I' m assu ming that it comes to $5 million once he adds in the 15 percent . And then with this item here , $2 .5 million when you break it out of Item 8.( d), am I correct in assu ming , then, - 1412 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 that the total bein g spent on Highways and Transportation is approxima tely $7 .5 million out of the Northlands Agreement? MR . ORCHA RD: What the Member for The Pas is asking is in combinatio n, you add in for road construc tion , the $2 .5 million in this appropri ation we just dis cussed , plus the $4 ,496 ,000 , and that is the total Northlands expenditures on road constructi on. MR . McBRYD E: That 's basically my quest ion . I wouldn 't use the words "road construction " , I Transportati on . Well , actually , Mr . Chairman, would say for Highways and MR . ORCHARD: Well , no, I believe you could call it road construction because 6. (

c) is all road construction, in this case , PRs . This $2 .5 million is strictly , we ll, it 's Resource Road but road construct ion. So there would be about $7 milli on expended under the Northlands Agreement for road construction. MR . McBRYD E: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, I guess I'l l have to check with the Ministe r , then, in terms of his decision and what is his thinking of the planning of the department in terms of spending $2 .5 million this year on one road, as opposed to spending a $1.5 million and $1 million on some other very urgent and necessary roads that would fall in this category , I think , such as the Jackhead Road or the Pelican Rapids Road . MR .

ORCHA RD: Well , you see , on resource roads we operate under the advice of Northern Affairs and I shouldn 't speak for another Minister but when you under take the road , such as we did into Cross Lake , you either spend all of the money and get your road ; like there 's no such a thing as spending half the dollars and building half the road . That situation has happened before where you have two -thirds of a road built and it is of no value to anybody .

So when you undertake a road construction you have to complete it and unfortunately , or fortunately for the community of Cross Lake in this case , it 's going to be completed right through , but it does take up a considerable amount of the available funds. But my department specifically did not say , "This is the one we want to build ." We oper ate under the direction of Northern Affairs. MR . McBRY DE : Mr. Chairperso n, to try and clarify that further , initially the agreement as it related to Transportation was aimed for a good part at this category , 8 (

d) as opposed to 6 (c ), I think the initial agreement says , "To pro vide basic access to remote communit ies ," in the Manitoba Northlands Agreement. And then there was some amendment to it last year , I belie ve , where they said, "upgrading of existing roads plus access to remote areas ." I wanted to have some understanding of how that decision takes place , how the allocation is decided $2.5 million towards resource roads and $4 .4 million towards - or more like 4. 5 million - towards upgrad ing existing roads. MR . ORCHA RD: Well, Mr. Chairman, once again , with this appropr iation as with 6 (

c) we operate on the advice of Northern Affairs, in conjunction wi th the federal department , the Feds providing 60 percent of the funding, and they tell us where they want to put their road programming and we undertake to put it in place. So really the decisions that I' m making are none in terms of location of the road . They tell me which road they want to build and we undertake to find a contractor , supervise the contract and put the road in place. MR . McBRY DE : Mr.

Chairperso n, I want to make this very clear that I under stand this, the Federal Department of Regional Economic Expansion says that there are so many million dollars in this Northlands Agreement for hi ghways and tells the Minister of Highways he 'l l do so many miles on 391, you'l l do the Cross Lake Road this year but we won't proceed with any other proje cts this year . Am I understanding the Minister correctly? MR . ORCHA RD: You understand corre ctly . When they have decided that the money goes to the Cross Lake Road , I' m advised that in terms of moneys which were , - 1413 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 let 's call it block funded, from the Northlands Agreement to upgrading of existi ng roads, they designat e X number of dollars , as they have done , then we , in co -operation with them, target them to the areas of, say , 391 that are in the most urgent need . So that in that respect on 6 (

c) there is a co-operation as to where , but it 's a unilateral decision on the basis of the Northlands Agreement as to how much . MR . McBRYD E: I wonder if the Minister could clarify his input into that decision, or his departm ent 's input into that decisi on, I am still not clear on that. I wanted the Minister , Mr. Chairper son , to clarify that his or the depart ment 's role in those decisio ns , does the de partment have no role at all then in making those decis ions or does the department make recommendations in terms of their pri oritie s, or how does it work? MR.

ORCHA RD: No , you 'r e re ferring specifically to 6.( c) - the departme nt 's input into 6.( c). MR . McBRYD E: Well , Mr. Chairman, I was asking the general question as to the dep artment 's and the Minister 's input into the programs to be proceeded with this year under the Northland Agreem ent . So then I would be talking about 6.(

c) and 8. ( d), and if there 's two di fferent procedure s, then maybe the Minister could tell me both of them; if it 's the same procedure he just needs to tell me one . MR . ORCHA RD : Well, as I understand it, it's the same procedure in dete r mining how many dollars are available . But, for instance, on the Cross Lake Road , they indicate that they want the road built into Cross Lake and we undertake to do that job for them using their money . In terms of the Northlands moneys that are found in 6. (c) , they will tell us the amount and we will help them place it along the various sections in need of 391.

So our direction is in attempting to spend it in the area of the greatest need on 391, having them given us a dollar figure to work with ; and in the second in stance of 8. (

d) as we have here , we are carrying out a project that has been mutually agreed upon by Northern Affairs and ORE E. MR . McBRY DE: Yes, Mr. Chairper son . I want to make sure that I understand this clearly and here 's what I think goes on then. In the case of 6.(

c) the Minister is aware of about the amount that 's going to be available and him and his de partment make recommendations as to their priorities under 6. ( c). Under 8. (d ), the Minister was just told by those that administer the agreement , OREE and the provinc ial Department of Northern Affairs , you will stop at the Cross Lake Road. Is that the correct

interpretation? MR . ORCHA RD: Yes, that 's correc t. MR . McBRYDE: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I wonder then when that decision was made that it would be that this resource roads allocation would go 100 percent to the Cross Lake Road , when would that decisi on have been made then? MR . ORCHARD : Well, you see there was $1. 7 million last year , so it would have to have been - and I' m guessing here - probably up to two years ago . MR . McBRY DE : Yes, Mr.

Chairman, then a very important and urgent question that comes out of this is that the Department of Hi ghways is pretty well now , in terms of northern construction as far as I understand these Estimate s, for north ern roads they 'r e depending on the Manitoba Northlands Agreeme nt . That is pretty well all the expenditures for northern roads are covered under the Manitoba Northlands Agreement.

Now the Minister mentioned the federal government put up the money , but I' m assuming that he means they put up 60 percent of the funds , or is he talking about cases where they 'r e putting up 100 percent under this agreement now? - 1414 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . ORCHA RD: Well, Mr. Chairman, on the roads that we are talking about, namely those appropriations under 6. (

c) and this parti cular one of $2 .5 million , these are under Manitoba Northlands , which the province contribute s 40 percent and DREE 60 percent . In addition to those project s that are in place the department is undertaking some 172 miles of road construction on 391 and 392 at 100 percent provincial dollars under this year 's program . MR . McBRY DE: Okay . If the Minister could just - I don't want him to re peat what he said the other day on 6.( c) - but is all that inform ation going to be in the record?

Was that made clear the other day on 6. (c ), in terms of exactly what dollars would be spent under 6. (c), which sections are covered by 6. (c)? MR . ORCHA RD: I think so . We discussed that pretty thoroughly . MR . McBRYDE : Yes, Mr. Chairman, then I can look that over in the records . My concern then, Mr. Chairman, is that the majority of funding for northern construction now is coming under the Manitoba Northlands Agreement .

That agree ment is not going to go on forever and I wonder if the Minister could indicate what 's going to happen when the Manitoba Northlands Agreement expires and they 'r e no longer getting 60 percent of $7 milli on or $8 milli on a year for northern con struc tion. What 's going to happen at that time? MR . ORCHA RD: Well , Mr.

Chairman , what will happen in future years is exactly what has happened in this year 's budget , where in addition to expending in the last year of the Northlands Agreement the balance of funds available , we are undertaking 172 miles using moneys in 6. (a ), Regular Program , to construct roads in northern Manitoba . MR . McBRYD E: Yes, Mr. Chairman, okay . I would like the Minister then just to finish what he was doing . He did ai rports , and he did the resource roads and we spent $3 .5 million of the $5 .l milli on. I wonder if he could spend the rest of it. MR . ORCHAR D: Certainly can.

On Community Airports we have four projects which total an expenditure of $308 ,000, they are at Ilford , Lac Broche t, Pikwitonei and Thicket Portage , and those are completion of airports under con structi on. MR . McBRYDE: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Could the Minister clarify the difference between ai rports and community ai rpor ts, like (

a) and (c)? MR . ORCHA RD: The airports all serve the same func tion. The difference for , I suppo se , want of classification is that one is ai rport improvem ents , in other words , to existing operational airpor ts ; and No . 3 is community airpo rts , construction of brand new ones or completion of newly built airstri ps . MR . McBRYD E: Mr. Chairpe rson , I' ve sort of jumped back and forth between (

a) and (

c) since they 'r e the same thing . I was making some assumption I guess that maybe airports were ones that in the past had been cost- shareable by the Minis try of Transport and in that way in the past the airport program was stretched out quite considerably because some air ports were cost- shared under MOT and some under Northlands and we were able to get quite a few done that way . I wonder if the Minister could tell us if there 's no more airports that qualify for Minist ery of Transport assi stance under their cost- shared program for ai rports of a certain size and usage . MR .

ORCHA RD: The expenditures in 3. , the $308 , OOO , are cost- shared with MOT . That is not correct , these are not MOT fund which have shared in the com pletion of construction on those four airstr ips . It is Canada-Manitoba Northlands Agreement funding which is shareable in the completion of construction on these four . Where MOT fits in is back on the operation of airports in 4. (d ), Airports and Roads, are recoverable from Canada if there is MOT. - 1415 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . McBRYD E: Yes, Mr. Chairman , the Minister , then was he going to get the community roads , the way he listed them the first time he had community roads list ed right after resource roads and I just wondered . MR . ORCHA RD: Community roads is next. MR . McBRY DE: Okay , go ahead. MR. ORCHA RD: We have an expenditure budgeted for $2, 08 3, 000 .00. It is going to take in the Norway House-Jenpeg road , Norway House bridge and approaches and Norway House internal roads . MR . CHAIRM AN: 8. ( d) . The Member for The Pas. MR . McBRY DE: In terms of the community roads dec isions , Mr.

Chairperson, I wonder if those decis ions are made by this Ministe r or how is that decision made as to which community gets aid . MR. ORCHA RD: This decision is the same as the resource road decision , where we are given a set af road proj ects and we undertake them. MR . McBRYD E: Yes, Mr. Chairman , in this case , would that decis ion basic ally be made by Northern Affairs and then get approval from the Department of Regional Economic Expansion , or does he know that process? MR . ORCHA RD: Yes, the same thing as the resource roads . MR . McBRYDE: Mr.

Chairper son , there has been quite a bit of work necessary to be done in Norway Hous e. However , there have been quite a few comm unities that there 's also necessary work to be done in, and I' m wondering, I suppose the question that comes to my mind is should those other communities come in and sit in at the Legislature this summer , and then next year they might appear in here the same way Norway House has appeared in here this year . I have no further questions on that subject . MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for Burrows , I think , had my eye earlier , I' m not sure if he still ••• MR .

HANUSCHAK: I had heard the Minister say , in response to my colleague, the Member for The Pas, that in dealing with 6. (

c) last night , that it rece ived extensive discussion and that the Minister had outlined the road programs under that appropria tion . I believe I was here for most of the evening, Mr . Chairman, but I really have no recollection of the Minister giving the commi ttee that type of information . I may be wrong. I have no recollection of it . I' m not sure what the Minister is saying , because I can't hear the nodding of his head . I believe the Ministe r is saying that he did provide us that informati on, is that correc t? MR . ORCHA RD: That is correct . MR .

HANUS CHAK : Then I will read Hansard and I' ll find it there . MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for Churchill . MR . COWAN : Thank you , Mr. Chairper son . The one item that I di dn 't catch , perhaps , was the item on the landings which was a new item. MR . ORCHA RD: It 's next . MR . COWAN: Okay , but perhaps before going into that , I ju st want to maKe certain that would be put on the record . The Minister said that the community airports was completion of airports that had been started ; and listed in that grouping , Ilford , Lac Brochet , Pikwitonei and Thicket Portage .

I would ask the Minister if he 's received representation from the community of Tadoule Lake in - 1416 -

Friday, 21 March, 1980 regard to an airport at that particular community ; and also from Waasagomach, which both now, well at least Waasagomach has an emergency landing strip which they are very dissa tisf ied with, and the community of Tadoule Lake is relying upon the ice in the lake during the summer, so they have no real airstrip there . I would ask the Minister if there any intentions on the part of his government to provide bette r service to at least those two communities in the very near future? MR . ORCHA RD: Well, we have received representation in our department from Tadoule Lake . MR .

McBRYDE: You have? MR . ORCHA RD: Yes. MR . ORCHA RD: 8. (d ). The Member for Churchill . MR . COWAN: Well, perhaps while we 'r e on that, I can then ass ure the Minister that Tadoule Lake is in need of an airst rip that will serve them year round . I' m not certain, I will have to check my files, I beli eve that I had written to the Minister myself in regard to this upon request of the people of Tadoule Lake . I' ll have to check and make certain that letter did, indeed, go ou t. I don 't know, does the Minister have any recollection of correspondence from myself in regard to that? MR . ORCHA RD: No . MR .

COWAN: Okay, I' 11 have to find the copy of that letter and make certain that he does get it, because it may have been waylaid by some accide nt .

I would ask the Minister, being advised now that Tadoule Lake does very badly need an ai rstr ip ; in a community such as Tadoule Lake, which is not serviced by rail, which is not serviced by any of the means of access, and probably will not be ser viced by any other means of access for a goodly number of years, the airport takes on added signif icance and if they had an airstrip there they could start landing the larger planes which would enable them to carry more freight in.

Right now it 's even more costly for them to get freight in than it is for a comm unity that has a st rip where a DC3 can land or a community that has a strip where a larger plane can la nd . They are confined to us ing the water during the summer, planes coming in on floats, and then there 's all the resultant di fficulties in getting the supplies off the plane onto the sho reline, and it 's just a difficult and costly process.

And then, of course, in the winter they can use the ice when the ice is thick enough, but between the times that they 're going from ice to the spring water during the breakup and during the freeze-up, then they are fairly well cut off altogether . That 's when you have your emergency situations that can result in rather disas trous consequences. That 's when you have real problems, medical problems in that planes can 't get in soon enough to get people out on an evacutation if that should become neces sary .

Couple that with the fact that Tadoule Lake is now presently only serviced by radio telephone and yo u'v e exas perated the situation significantly, because now you have problems even getting the communications out to get the planes in if the planes could come in or go out, depending on the breakup and freeze-up con diti ons .

So, I would suggest to the Minister that I will be forwarding to him a copy of a letter which I know was written previously by myself, and I will make certain that the Chief of Tadoule Lake and the council of Tadoule Lake are in touch with the Ministe r and hope that he would entertain their representation with a sincere motivation for trying to implement some ways of bringing in an airport or airstrip service to that community where it 's very badly needed . The Minister said he hadn't received representation from Tadoule Lake .

Has he received representation from the community of Waasagomach in regard to ai rstrip improvem ent? In that particular instance, they have an emergency strip and, as the people in the community told me, the reason they call it an emergency strip is if you land on that strip , it 's an emergency. And I have had the opportunity to go there and see the st rip and to even walk along the strip and it 's rather hilly country, and I would not be comfortable landing there. The only way I would land - 1417 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 on that strip is if an emergency necessitated it . So I would ask the Minister if he has received representation from representat ives of that community in regard to repairing that strip. MR . ORCHA RD: Well , Mr. Chairman, I haven 't personally and I am just checking to see whether the department had . Not recently , the dep artment hasn 't had discuss ions with them recently about upgrading that strip. I haven 't had di s cussions with them. MR .

COWAN : Well then, perhaps I'l l ask then, is the Minister prepared to entertain a representation from that community in regard to det ermining whether or not that strip is adequate, because that 's a decisi on that the Minister has to make . The community , as I said , and I concur with them , beli eve it to be in adequate . But would the Minister be prepared to do that and also do so with the sincere motivation towards meeting the , what I consider to be , very ligiti mate requests of that community .

Again , it is a problem that manifests itself most di rectly and most significantly during the winter and spring thaws and freezes, when they can't get the people out in case of a med-evac . emergency , although it does also have great difficulties in getting mail in and out of the communities and getting services in and out of the communiti es. So I would ask the Minister if he is prepared to do that and I' ll try to get word back to the community as quickly as poss ible so that we can start the ball rolling on that. MR . ORCHA RD: I am always prepared to meet with our citi zens of Manitoba in their needs . MR .

CHAIRMAN: 8. The Member for Churchill . MR . COWA N: Thank you , Mr. Chairper son . The Minister also in this item has a category called Airport Improvem ent . Would moneys in that category be applic able to the Leaf Rapids Airport , which again is experiencing some di fficulties because when that airport was initially constructed , it was not constructed long enough to accommodate the larger planes and accommodate jet service in partic ular .

So what happens now is if some one wants to fly into Leaf Rapids they can not fly di rect ; they have to fly eit her di rect to Lynn Lake and drive down or they have to fly direct to Thompson and then get on a Twin Otter . And it 1 s an ex tremely costly procedure when you have to make that either extra trip into Lynn Lake and drive down or when you have to change a plane.

I am not certain of the exact figures but I know I have had to do that myself and the cost di fferential between flying into Lynn Lake directly and flying into Leaf Rapi ds , which is a shorte r dist ance, is significantly more for flying into Leaf Rapids because you have to make a switch on to a Twin Otter or a smaller plane. So I would ask the Minister if this would be the appropriate area to dis cuss improvements to that particular strip. MR . ORCHA RD: Mr.

Chairman, no it wouldn 1 t be but I can tell the member that is under the Department of Economic Development in their • • • Well, I for get what the appropriation is in. I think there is going to be some work ongoing there as a matter of fact. MR . COWA N: Well , that 's good news from the Minister , Mr . Chairper son. I will be , of course , attempting to be in the committee to pursue that when it comes up under the Department of Economic Development so that we can ascertain exactly what is being done and how it would fit in with the requests of the community . I would also like to. MR .

ORCHARD: If I might turn the floor over to the Minister of Labour , he has more detail on that Leaf Rapids . MR . CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Labour . MR . MacMASTER : I think, Mr. Chairman, that the Member for Churchill will find , in the last two or three days , it 's either been a $10 ,000 amount of a - 1418 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 $20 , OOO amount has been earmarked for upgrading of the airport at Leaf Rapids to help the municip ality with the ongoing costs . I talked to some of the Leaf Rapids officials two months ago , I guess , and they raised that particular point , that they were not in fact getting specific funds and they are one of the few municip alities , if not the only one in Manitoba , who does in fact have a di rect responsibility to maintain their own municipal ai r port .

And I agreed that it was a somewhat di fferent set of circumstances where Canada looks after the major ones and Northern Affairs looks after others. So they certainly were caught in the middle , and I' m guessing at the amount ; it was eit her $10 ,000 or $20 ,000 that is going towards the munic ipality to upgrade and maintain that . I still think , further to that , you may find that the Ministe r of Economic Development may be doing something else in that area. MR . COWAN : Thank you , Mr. Chairper son .

I thank the Minister of Labour for that information and I am certain that , although I can't make a value judgement now as to the amount and what that amount will do , I am certain that the community will ask for more , and maybe just ifiably so, I am not certain; I' ll have to dis cuss that with • • • But we will be pursuing that matter further . On the item of Resource Roads, I believe the Minister said that a resource road is a road that primarily services a comm unity ; in other words , goes into the com munity and does not pass through as opposed to a road that passes through a com munity .

Is that correct? MR . ORCHA RD: Yes. MR . COWAN: The reason I ask that, Mr. Chairper son , is that I would want to talk about the community at South Indian Lake and I belie ve that would come under this particular item . Is that not true? Under the item of Resource Roads? MR . ORCHARD : Well ye s, it would , but it would be of no avail to speak to this Minister on that road because it would be the Northern Affairs Department who would put the wheels in motion for my department to undertake such a construction proj ect , if desi rable . MR . COWAN: I thank the Minister for that information .

We 'll certainly try to bend the ear of the Ministe r of Northern Affairs when the opportunity presents itsel f. I will jus t then ask the Minister if he could outline the $250 ,000 item for Ferry Landings. MR . ORCHARD: We are spending that on reconstruction on several of the ferry lan din gs . Some of them were not adequately constructed when first built and , you know, at the time they were built there was a shortage of proper materials and we have had changing water levels since that time .

So we have to undertake some fairly extensive repairs and , in one case , a relocation for proper alignment , apparently , to bring the ferry landings up to a more serviceable level. MR . COWAN: Yes, thank you . Just pursuant to that , then this is basically a one-year item; it would be an item that we would not expect to see on an ongoing bas is? MR . ORCHA RD: Yes. MR . CHAIRMAN: 8.( d}--p as s; 8.( e}- -pass. Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $5 ,555 ,000 for Highways and Transpor tation, Acquis ition/ Construction of Physical Assets--pas s. Resolution 88 , 9. (a) .

The Member for St . Johns . MR . CHERNIACK: Mr . Chairman, at the request of the Minis ter , I' ve been waiting for this part to deal with the question of the negotiations which took place as between the Department of Highways and the Manitoba Public Insurance Corpora tion. Fir stly , have those negotiations been completed? MR . ORCHA RD: Yes, Mr. Chairman. - 1419 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . CHERNIACK: Secondly, has there been a cash adj ustm ent as between the two parties? MR . ORCHARD: No . MR . CHERNIACK : How much are we talking about that has been declared as owing from one party to the other for past services? MR. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, we have establi shed a new cost- sharing formula which is reflected in the Estimate figure this year . In terms of going back and making the appropriate adj ustments for past years , that calculation and those negotitions have not been completed to date , they are in preliminary stages. MR .

CHERNIACK: How will the adjustm ent be made once the amount has been established? MR . ORCHA RD: Assuming that the adjus tment is in the favour of MVB the Moto r Vehicle Branch , and funds will be forthcoming from MPIC, those would go into general revenue . MR . CHERNIACK: Is the Minister not aware yet whether or not there will be an adjustment in favour of the Department of Highways? MR . ORCHARD: Yes, by all appearances there is going to be an adj ustment in our favour . Our figures indicate that it should be somewhere around $1.5 milli on. MR . CHERNIACK: So , Mr.

Chairman, we 'r e not speculating and there 's no assum ption . we know that there will be a payment passing from MPIC to the Department of Highways to General Revenue , which the Minister est imates to be - I think he said $1.5 milli on . ye s. MR . ORCHA RD: Somewhere in the neighbourhood of $1 million to $1.5 million , MR . CHERNIACK: For what period of time is that , Mr. Chairman? MR. ORCHA RD: That takes us back to November 1, 1978 . MR .

CHERNIACK : Since the Minister is expecting that there will be between $1 milli on and $1.5 million , how can he adjust that Estimate wi th the one which appears in the Annual Report of the MPIC on Page 3 which rea ds: "The proposed changes to the share-cost arrangements between MPIC and Motor Vehicle Branch accounts for $2 . 6 million of the increase, 11 and they say that that 's retroactive to November 1, 1978. There seems to be over a million dollar dis crep ancy. What am I saying , a million - yes , over a million dollar discrep ancy between the MPIC statement and the Ministe r 's expectation s. MR.

ORCHA RD: Well , I really can't account for how MPIC has arrived at their $2 .6 milli on. MR . CHERNIACK: Mr.

Chairman, I know that the Minister has received the Annual Report , which doesn 't mean he read it , but I also know that the Mini ster knew that we were going to be asking questions along this line at this stage and I would think that it 's a rather important dis crepancy when you 'r e dealing with one side of $1 million to $1.5 milli on, and the other side , $2 .6 milli on, and the negotiator , as I understand it, is present in this room today , because I think that the Minister made it clear that the Assistant Deputy Minister responsible for the Motor Vehicle Branch was the representat ive of his de partment .

Whether or not it isn't rather important that we get some kind of reconciliati on , be it 10 per cent , be it $100 ,000 , but surely not over $1 million out of $2 .6 milli on. I wonder if the Minister couldn 't just review that . - 1420 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR. ORCHA RD: Well, Mr. Chairman, we have done our preliminary calculation as to what we believe will be paid by MPIC to us for services from November 1, 1978 to present , and obviously MPIC has done the same kind of calculation ; they have come up with $2 .6 milli on and we don 't know at this point in time how they arrived at that calculation. MR· CHERNIACK: I just want to make sure I heard the Minister corre ctly . Did he say that the calculation from November 1, 1978 to the present , according to his calculation , is somewhere between $1 million and $1.5 million? MR .

ORCHA RD: That 's correc t. MR . CHERNIACK: '-_That means, Mr. Chairman, according to what the Minister said , that we 'r e dealing with almost 17 months , which the Minister says adds up to $1.5 million and the report I' m referring to speaks of $2 .6 million for 12 months. So the dis crepancy is much greater than I first understood .

Now the dis crepancy must be - wow - it mus t be more than ha lf, that is , if we take 17/12ths of 2.6 milli on - I don 't know who is quick enough to do that , but I would guess it 's about $3.5 million as compared with the Minister 's calculation of $1 million to $1.5 million for the 17 months. And the di fference is so great that I am really surprised , Mr. Chairman. I want to remind the Minister that MPIC is not some company outside somewhere which has no relationship with government but , indeed , it 's his Cabinet which is responsible for the operations of this Crown Corporation .

And I would think that it is really incumbent on any Ministe r of the Crown, and especially the former Minister for Hi ghways , who is the present Ministe r resp onsible for MPIC, and the present Mini ster of Highways , to have some feeling of responsibility for being able to account between these two figures and the tremendous dis crepancy between them. Does the Minister want to undertake to explain that before we complete his dep artment, in which case I would move to something else? MR . ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, I can't really undertake an explanation for the di fference , but we will take the $3.5 milli on.

MR . CHERNIACK: really se riously • • Mr. Chairman, I am taking this question, this problem MR . ORCHA RD: As am I, when you 'v e got $2 million on the table , we 'l l take it, Mr. Chairman. MR . .CHERNIA CK: And now, Mr. Chairman , we have a presumably responsible Minister of the Crown who makes the statement that they will take . Who will take? The Crown will take . From whom will they take? From a Crown Corporation, a $2 mill ion dis crepancy , we will take . Mr .

Chairman, what bothers me is the possibili ty that the government will take money out of proportion to what it ought to have on a proper cost- sharing basi s, in order , poss ibly, to improve the financial picture of the government , at the expense of a Crown Corporation which this government does not belie ve in at all, in philosophy . The Minister , too glibly to my way of thinking, explains the di fferential by the $2 milli on. --(Interj ection)-- Now, Mr. Chairman, I' m hearing some talk from across the hall from me .

I want to make it clear to the honourable members opposite that there is nothing that I know of in the espousal of philosop hy of the Conservative Party which is supportive of a public insurance corporation such as Autopac . There have been clear statements from Ministe rs, including the First Minister , that they will not "destroy" Autop ac . But, Mr.

Chairman, never have I heard the members di rectly opposite from me today speak in favour of a public insurance corporation , nor have I heard the Ministers of the Crown, any of them, I think, that I' ve been able to hear - so let me say , the First Minister , the Minister of Finance, the present Minister responsible for the Public Insurance Corporation - say that they believe in the principle and the philosop hy of a public insurance corporation. - 1421 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 So, Mr . Chainnan, since we have evidence of past attempts , to some extent succ essful , of this government affecting adversely the operation of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation, and I will document it if anybody wants me to, and I will document it , if not today on another occas ion, whether or not they want me to, that my statement is correc t. But the point I' m making , Mr .

Chairman, is that si nce the Minister says that he is absolutely serious - and I gave him an out , I said , "I do not treat it lightly , I treat it serious ly ," and he said so does he - I take it very seriously that he will seriously say , "I will take what I can get . I' ll take an extra $2 million from the Crown corporatio n of MPIC .11 So , Mr. Chairman, I will pause for a moment to see if the Minister does want to respond to my statement . If he doesn 't, I' ll go on. MR. ORCHA RD: Mr .

Chairman , obviousl y, if that is the money, $3 .5 milli on, as det ennined on the 17-month calculation, if that is the dollar figure that the negotiations come up with between MVB and MP IC on the moneys owing by MPIC to Motor Vehicle Branch , certainly I will take that $3 .5 milli on. If it is $1.5 mi llion, I will take that $1.5 mi llion. We will arrive at a figure once we have negotiations on the same costings, etc. , etc. , and we know that we are comparing apples and apples and poss ibly , as it appears, not apples and oranges, which has arrived at a 2. 6 versus a 1.5 comparison right now.

But if MPIC owes the gover nment for services per formed , $3 .5 milli on, certainly the government will take that $3 .5 milli on, if it is so owed. MR . CHERNIACK: Mr . Chairman, the Minister , when I first raised this ques tion at the beginning of his Estimate s, did not deny his responsibility , as a Minister of the Crown in charge of the Motor Vehicle Branch , for the participation in these negotiatio ns.

He did refuse to answer di rect questio ns , saying , "Well, he 's asking for figures and numbers and I will deal with that under MVB. 11 Now he is saying , If it becomes known that - those are my words , not hi s, but the intent is clearly - I infer from what he said that that 's what he means. If it becomes known somehow that there is $3 milli on or $1.5 million of $3 .5 milli on payable to the Motor Vehicle Branch and he will accept it , it seems to deny completely his resp onsibil ity and his partic ipation in these negotiation s. Now let 's get something clear , Mr . Chairman.

Does the Minister have any know ledge of the negotiations and the calculations that have been arrived at to date, on which he bases this estimate? Does he , himsel f, know what he 's talking about in this regard? MR. ORCHA RD: Well , Mr . Chairman , when the Member for St . Johns one week ago was asking me about whether in fact the new cost- sharing formula was involved in the drawing up of the 1980-81 Estimate , I said , yes, it was , we were operat ing on a 55 -4 5 cost- sharing formula. MR . CHERNI ACK : No , you never used those figures. MR . ORCHA RD: Okay , I stand corrected by the Member for St . Joh ns.

I did not use speci fic numbers but I did indicate that these Estimates were drawn up on the basis of the new cost- sharing formula. That is what has in fact taken place and that cost breakdown turns out to be that instead of an 80-20 ratio , it is now a 55 -4 5 breakdown in cost sharing . MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr.

Chairman, the Minister , who apparently is not sure of his figures and says , "Well, we 'l l take it if we find out it's an extra million for the year ," in exces s of a mi llion, also indicates that there is a possibility that he has over-estimated his expenditu res in this dep artment by a million dol lars and that therefore the deficit at the end of the year, or the surplus at the end of the year , can now be pred icted to be over a million dollars out , according to his own statement. MR . ORCHARD: Woul d the Honourable Member for St .

Johns like to clarify how I have this year under-estimated my departmental Estimates by $1 mil lion? - 1422 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . CHERNIACK: I'l l be glad to try to cl ari fy it for the Ministe r . The MPIC esti mates that the year November 1, 1978 to October 31, 1979, makes an ad ju stment necessary of $2 .6 million in favour of the Department of Highways . That $2 .6 milli on is well over $1 milli on more than what the Minister indicates he has shown in these Estimates as being the di fferential, that being the amount by which he would have changed the figure s.

Now, actually , if one looks at the item itse lf, which I am guessing is (b ). (2) - I' m guessin g , because that 's the only substantial reduction that I see - there 's a reduction there of about $1, 100 , OOO . 00 . That 1 s of course less than between - no, it is between $1 mil lion and $1.5 milli on. But it 's ce rtainly not $2 .6 mil lion, based on the dollars of 1978-79. So that if the Minister had di fficulty understanding my arithmetic , I hope he now understands how it is I arrive at the poss ibility that he is over-estimating his expenditures by in excess of, substan tially in excess of $1 milli on.

MR . ORCHARD: Mr . Chairman, the 1.5 million that I re ferred to as the guesstimate of what would be owing for the time since November 1, 1978, as I mentio ned initia lly , is not revenues accruing to this department . Those are revenues accruing to the Province of Manitoba, General Revenue Account. MR . CHERNI ACK : Is the Minister saying that this year 's split of cost -sharing will be reflected in the revenue items and not the expendit ure items ; is that what the Minister is saying? MR .

ORCHARD: As of November 1, 1978 until March 31, 1980, it is est imated by Moto r Vehicle Branch that they should receive $1.5 million in revenue, whi ch, if it comes, will accrue to the General Revenues of the provinc e, nothing to do with Motor Vehicle Branch , Department of Highways . MR . CHERNIACK: Right . MR. ORCHA RD: What we are dealing with in my Estimates this year is the appropriation for April 1, 1980 to March 31, 1981, in which Motor Vehicle Branch Estimates have been calculated , basis the new cost-sharing formula between MP IC and MVB, of 55- 45. MR . CHERNIACK: All right , Mr . Chairman .

What we now recognize , of course , is this tremendous di fference of , well, maybe a $2 million di fference between the calculations of MPIC and MVB for the period about to expire now, this month . And clearly that will be reflected , whether it 's $1 million to $1.5 milli on, as stated by the Minister , or maybe $4 million - am I right about that? - well, $3 million anyway - a guess by MPI C, whatever that amount is , will be sh own as Revenue in the fiscal year about to start and shown as a deficit or an impact on MPIC as of a year and a half ago, or at least half a year ago .

Which means clearly that the books of the government's operations will be distorted , obviously distorted , simply by the fact that the MPIC is showing a loss for a year which ended last Octob er and the government will be showing a gain for the year yet to come .

Which means, if all these figures are correct and I'v e yet to sati sfy myself, that where the government should have shown moneys due in this current year about to expire as being revenue, it is post poning that revenue for a year and forcing, as I believe they have done through the state of the MP IC, the MPIC to show a loss for a year different to the yea r in which the government is gaining the money. That 1 s why I asked whether the amount was settled . That 's why I wondered whether we would see the reflection in the two years properly .

I would hope that si nce the books aren't yet closed by this government , that the Auditor at least , if not the government itself , will make very sure that there is a closer relation ship between the years than what I think the Minister indicated . Now, the Minis ter may not know but as I understand , the Ministe r said very clearly whatever amount is sett led as owing from MPIC to the government , will be shown in next year 's revenue. So clearly there is a de finite dis tortion as between two fiscal years. Instead of both showing in the same year, they 111 be shown in two di fferent years. - 1423 -

Friday , 21 Mar ch , 1980 I hope the Ministe r is wrong and I hope that the Audito r , at le as t , will force - well, let 's be more gentle - will insi st that the two years be much more compar able and they can •t be completely because they are not exactly the same fiscal years, that they will re flect more honest ly , more truly the change resulting from the negotiation s. All right .

So now we find the one dis crepancy is sti ll correctable - and I hope the Minister will make sure that it is corrected - and that is that his st atement that the revenue for past adj ustments will be credite d to next year 's income . I hope he's wrong and I hope that he will make sure that he is shown to be wrong by having it more properly shown in this current fiscal year , at least as an accrued ac counts rece ivable if they can't get paid in advance of that.

I am really surprised that a good business ope ration, knowing that there 's between $1 mil lion claimed and $2 .6 milli on admit ted, as it is, that th ey'l l get the money in fast and get it in at least on account , to make sure that it 's closer to ••• Mr . Chairman, you 'r e a busines sman . You would never permit a fellow who admits owing you money , and you claim that he owes you less than he admits owing you , you would never permit him to withhold paying you at least what you claim is owing you , which is the picture I get from this Mini ster .

He says they are going to have to pay us between $1 mi llion and $1.5 milli on. They say they are going to be owing us $2 .6 milli on. When it does come in we will credit it to next year 's revenue . Any good bus inessman would say , if you admit owing me $2 .6 milli on, I only claim $1 million or $1.5 milli on, pay me at least what I claim you owe me and later on we 'l l fight about whether or not you 'r e going to force me to pay you more than I think you owe me. MR . ORCHA RD: Mr. Chairman, I want to make a correction to the Member for St . Joh ns .

He indicated that I said it would be credi ted , any refund from MPIC would be credite d to next year 's revenue s. I didn't indicate it would be credited to next year 's revenues. I said it would be credited to government revenues. I did not specif y a year. I do not know what year it will be credited because I don't account for the books of this province ; that would be the Provincial Auditor 's job. And in the Member for St . Johns ' concern about the disto rtion of the deficit picture , de pending upon which year that crept , if any , and how much is credited to general government revenue s.

If it should happen to be in the next fiscal year it will have , as he is indicating, the effect of decreas ing or dis to rting the de ficit downward . Bu t, Mr . Chairman , that will only be as a reflection of how much the lack of that payment dis torted the de ficit upward this year . It is six of one and a half a dozen of the other . Because if the dollars are owing , except for the semantics of det ermining the level of the de ficit, it is money owing to the gener al revenue of the province which at some point in time , must be paid . MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr . Chairman, the Minister made two points .

One is that I misin terpreted what he said , that may be true . I thought he said next year but if he did not mean to say next year, then I think • • • MR . ORCHA RD: I did not say that . MR . CHERNIACK : And now he says he doesn 't really know. So we 'l l let it go . MR . ORCHA RD: I said I did not say that. MR . CHERNIACK : He said he doesn 't really know which year it will go into. MR . CHAIRM AN: The Honourable Minister on a point of order. MR . ORCHA RD: I said I did not say next year. I said it would be credited to the government revenue. I did not assign a year . MR . CHERNIACK : Mr .

Chairman, I' m sure that quietly you might whispe r to the Minister that he had no point of order whatsoeve r and that he did n't even have a point of privilege , but that 's arguable . - 1424 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 Bu t what he did say - this he did say - is tha't he doesn 't know whether it will be this year or next year, that is this month or next month , he didn 't know that , and I agree . Now, I agree he doesn 't know it . I would urge him as a member of the Cabinet to make very sure that he not only finds out , but that he makes every effort to persuade his Minister of Finance to strai ghten this thing out so there isn 't the dis to rtion, which he says is six of one or six of another .

I might agree with him had I not already known on the record , that the MPIC has been forced to show a defic it in a year, in a preceding year , and I don't know - well, I assume that that 's in the correct year - which cannot be reflected by any Minister of Finance fully because there 's half a year di fferential.

But if not for the fact that his Minister and his First Minister are bus ily quoting percent ages, percentage up , percentage down, look how good we look , look how fine we are, look what good managers we are , that therefore , I cannot trust him, because I cannot trust hi s First Ministe r as Minister of Finance, to give clear pictures of year by year management of his co mpany when we find here that there are distor tions which he ad mits. So it 's not si x of one or six of another .

It would be if this were a private little business being run by the Minister and his colleagues where they were accountable to themselves only. But they 'r e not , they 'r e accountable to the taxpayers and they 'r e accountable every four years at least. So let 's make sure that we understand it 's not si x of one or half a dozen of the other when you are dis to rting the picture as he admits will likely take place. MR. CHAIRMAN: 9. (a)(l ) •• MR . CHERNIACK: Mr . Chairman , the Minister has now for the firs t time given us a formula which he said was 55 -45. Could he elaborate on the nature of that formula?

Just what does that mean? MR. ORCHAR D: The costs undertaken by MPIC and the registration of motor vehicles in the province of Manitoba are shared between MP IC, as a user of that service and the Motor Vehicle Branch as a user of that servi ce. It has been det ermined through negotiation between the two parties that roughly 90 percent of the information required on the registration of vehic le s is required di rectly by MPIC and Moto r Vehicle Branch . The other 10 percent of the informa tion accumulated on the registration is required strictly by Motor Vehicle Branch.

Hence to arrive at a cost- sharing formula the 90 percent of common information was split in half resulting in 45 percent charge-out by MPIC and then the addi tio nal 10 percent of information required only by Motor Vehicle Branch , was added to the 45 percent to arrive at a 55 percent cost-sharing by MV B. MR . CHERNI ACK: What were the terms of reference which this Minister gave to his Assi stant Deputy Minister on these negotiations? Mr . Chairman, I realize maybe I shoul dn't mean this Mini ste r , I would have to mean "the" Minister of Highways , whoever he was at the time . MR .

ORCHA RD: Well, the basic instructi ons were to determ ine the level of information sharing on that registration function, between Motor Vehicle Branch and MPIC and to det ermine a more equitable sharing of the costs, more equitable than the existing 80-20 formula that had been in existence. MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr . Chairman, I ju st want it clarified . The Ministe r says the new formula is 55 percent at the expense of the Motor Vehicle Branch and 45 at the expense of the Insurance Corporatio n. MR . ORCHARD: That 's correct . MR .

CHERNI ACK : And I' m guessing then, or I' m assuming then, that the former formula which he says was 80 -20 , was 80 percent on the Motor Vehicle Branch. The Minister uses the words "informatio n sharing". Is that the basis, the information requ ired from some , I suppose, data? Is that it? Is it information we 'r e talking about? - 1425 -

Friday , 21 March, 1980 MR . ORCHARD: Well , yes, it's the data elements or information, in layman's te rms, that are required by MPIC in insuring a vehic le , as opposed and in conjunc tion with the information required by MVB , in licencing a vehicle . MR . CHERN IAC K : Well, then the whole cost , the only fac tor that we'v e been told about is informatio n seeking enquiri es. Is that all? I mean, is that the formula that was agreed upon? That it was the volume of information that would dete rmine the percentage split ? MR . ORCHARD: via the comp uter , divisi on, yes .

Well , as the process ing of the volume of that informatio n, is di rectly related to the information requ ired by each MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr. Chairman, I think I understand the Minister but for the record I want to know, was the entire formula based on the volume of information requested by each of the two parties? MR . ORCHARD: That is a fair nutshell

interpretation of how the cost- -sharing formula was developed . MR . CHERNI ACK : Then I assume it has nothing to do with the fact that each has to collect money , have to sort out money , they have to pay premi ums in one case and commi ssions and insurance and licensing it self. MR. ORCHA RD: The fee collection of insurance is a function strictly to Autop ac. The fee collection for licensing is MVB and they aren't figured into that formula. We're talking about the registration function, Autopac uses primarily the same information that Motor Vehicle Branch uses in registe ring . MR . CHERN IACK : Mr .

Chairman, early this year, in January , I sent in a cheque for my driver's lice nce and in February I sent a cheque for vehicle li cence. I assume I sent the cheque to the Mini ster of Finance. I •m just guessin g that that was the payee on the cheque . What happened to that cheque ? Who handled it? MR . ORCHARD: The driver 's licence cheque was handled by our department . MR. CHERN IACK : And when it was rece ived , a ce rtain portion of that I be li eve was attributable to the insurance. What happened then? MR. ORCHA RD: The insurance portion is sent over to MP IC. MR . CHERNIACK: Who pays the cost of that?

MR. ORCHA RD: The cost of undertaking that transaction is sh ared between MVB and MPIC. MR . CHERNIACK: On what basis? MR . ORCHARD: 55 -45. MR • CHER NI ACK : information? Mr . Chairman, what does that have to do with seeking MR . ORCHA RD: Well , in the driver licence there is shared information that both MVB needs and MP IC needs, such as the age, the sex . Those informations are need by both divi sions and are shared . MR . CHERNI ACK: So , Mr .

Chairman, the cost of collecting the funds is laid out by the government ; the cost of sep arating the funds and ship ping the insurance port io n of the insurance co mpany is paid by the government , and then the govern ment recaptures 55 percent of that cost from the MVIB , because the insurance - 1426 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 company has 55 percent of the inquiri es. -- ( Interject io n)-- 45 percent . That 's correct. I'l l correct that , MR. ORCHA RD: Would you just make sure we 'r e talking the same numbers and repeat that please? MR . CHERNI ACK : Yes, I understand the MPIC portion is 45 perc ent.

So the provincial government 's. .well, this de partment we 'r e dealing with, pays the entire cost of receiving the money , dep osit ing the money , credit ing the money to wherever it ought to be in terms of which people have paid for the licence, issues the licence, doe s the paper work , actually pays for the printed paper , then it calculates how much of that money rece ived for driver 's licence belongs to the MPIC , sends it to the MPIC and then collects from the MP IC , 45 percent of that cost . Is that correct? MR . ORCHA RD: That 's correct . MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr .

Chairman, I want to de fer for a minute only to the Member for St . George who disagrees with my interpretatio n. MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for St . George . MR . URUSKI : Mr . Chairman, hearing the Minist er , I hope that the Minister will clari fy as to where the staff is and who actually handles the processing of the paper , how the costs are allocated is a di fferent matte r . Are all the pro cessing of the documents , namely , the registratio n, like the kind I am holding in my hand, are they done by MVB at 1075 Portage Avenue? MR . ORCHARD: Well , Mr .

Chairman, in the specific question of driver 's licence , which I assumed we were dealing with, that is correct. MR . CHERNIA CK: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . Now, Mr. Chairman , when we send a cheque for vehicle licence, there are some people who pay it in instalments, which puts an addition al cost on the MPIC and I th ink that there is a penalty involved - is that correct? - for the instalment payment . Who pays that cost of processing? MR . ORCHA RD: Okay , there are two things that the Member for St . Johns has indicated .

If the person pays his registration in one payment, we are making a si milar comparison to the person who purchased the driver 's licence and made one payment, okay? And the costs of doing that are shared on the 45/55 with the Motor Veh icle Branch paying 55 percent of the cost of that registration transaction. MR . CHERN IACK : Who pays that? I mean, who actually pays the money , hires the staff, pays for the paper work , pays for the paper itsel f? MR . ORCHA RD: In the vehicle registration function, that is MP IC. MR . CHERNIACK: government? Then the MPIC does the whole thing and it bi lls the MR .

ORCHARD: It bi lls the government for it 's share , yes. MR . CHERNIACK : Well, it bills it for 55 percent of that cost . And when there are instalment payments? MR . ORCHA RD: Well , there is where you 'v e got a little di fferent wrinkle . The government is still billed at 55 percent of the costs but the carrying charge, in other words, the surcharge for the split registration payment is 100 percent revenue to MPIC not shareable by MVB . MR . CHERNIACK: Mr . Chairman , could the Minister tell us what was the total cost of this ope ration in 1978? Well, let 's say in this year . - 1427 -

Friday , 21 March, 1980 MR . ORCHA RD: Let me just clari fy the information the member wants. MR . CHERNIACK : I want to know, Mr . Chairman, the total cost to the Motor Vehicle Branch and to the Insurance Corporatio n. Actually , I' m going to try to get at the total cost for those two units for this licencing operatio n, I want to get from November 1, 1978 to October 31, 1979. And if I'm not going to get it •• • and the head shaking , I see --(I nterjecti on )-- No , I' m not going to get it.

Then I will ask the Minister what is the esti mated total cost of the Insurance Corporation and the Motor Vehicle Branch for the year about to end, that is, the year ending March 31, 1980. MR . ORCHA RD: We might be able to do be tter on that . MR . CHERNIACK : I see . MR . ORCHA RD: Mr . Chairman, does the Member for St . Johns want the total cost for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1980? Is that what you asked for? that . MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr . Chairman, I' d like a lot more but I assume I can get MR . ORCHA RD: That 's what you wanted though? MR. CHERNI ACK : For the time being, that's what I want. MR .

ORCHA RD: Mr . Chairman, we 'r e going to have to provide the member with that figure at a later date because we do not have matchable -type figures. There is a wee amount of confusion with the di fferent year ends between MPIC and the province and we can't come up with that figure . MR . CHERNIACK: Mr . Chairman, I wonder if the Minister would indicate whether he thinks it possible to have it on M:>nday , say. MR . ORCHA RD: We will certainly try . MR . CHERNIACK : Mr . Chairman, I appreciate the Minist er's indication that he thinks we can have it on Monday .

I want to point out to him where it is that I am confused . I would think that the big quarrel would be whether it should be 45 /55 or whether it sh oul d be 44 /56 , there would be, I think , a bi g discussion about what is a fair percentage , and the next di scussion would be of what , we have yet to go into , percentage of what. So meanwhile , I am really stuck by the fact that there 's this tremendous di scre pancy between the insurance corpora tion 's calculation or estimate , and the Minister 's. He said between $1 million and $1.5 milli on for a seventeen-month peri od .

The MPIC says $2 .6 milli on for a twelve -month period . I haven't done the calculation, Mr . Chairman, but I have done thi s simple calculation. If $2 .6 milli on is 45 percent , then it is 45 percent of $5 .8 mi llion. That 's easy arithm eti c , helped by a machine , a calculator .

If it is halfway between $1 million and $1.5 milli on, that is, $1.4 milli on , and represents 45 perc ent , then 100 percent is $2 .8 mi llion; and further to make it confusing, is that according to the Minister 's calculation, it's $2 .8 million over seventeen months , and according to the MPIC , is $5 .8 mi llion over twelve months . And just for fun and to show how easy it is to calculate, if we say $5 .8 mi llio n for twelve months and we divide that by twelve months and multiply it by seventeen months, it would be $8 .2 millio n. Mr .

Chairman, on my calculation on what really seems to be si mple arithm etic , there is a discr epancy of $8 . 2 milli on as an esti mate by MPIC , as compared with $2 .8 million by the Minister . Now you can't tell me that that has ye t to be det ermined , what is so wildly di fferent , and I am quite prepared to leave that now because the discrep ancy is so great that there must be an error in the information given to us and I would hope by M:>nday it will be corrected . So , Mr .

Chairman, I would li ke to ask the Minister now, on the understanding that we will come back on M:: mday to get the answer , I would like to ask him now, perc entage of what? Now the Minister said that it is their cost I - 1428 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 underst and the formula is based on the amount of information demanded . I suppose that can be es timated in some way . But it has to be a percentage of a certain number of dollars, and I would like to make sure that I understand the dollar charges by each of the two parties. For example , an obvious indication would be whether the Motor Vehicle Branch 1 s charges include a part of the Minister 's salary , or a part of general overhead of governme nt, or a part of the Provincial Audito r 's charges. Is that part of the calculation? MR .

ORCHA RD: My salary is not part of that cost- sharing , no. MR . CHERNI ACK : Well, Mr . Chairman, then we can re fine it down to, is part of Mr . Dyg ala' s income sh own as part of the charges on the government side. MR . ORCHA RD: No , Mr . Chairman. MR . CHERNIACK: Then, Mr . Chairman, is no part of admi nistration included as a cost of the MVIB? MR . ORCHA RD: We have got a portion of the Assistant Deputy Minister 's salary charged in the MVB appropriation to the Drivers ' Licencing function. MR .

CHERNIACK : If what he is saying is that the cost of the MVB is limited to what is on this page, that is Page 66, I can understand that , but that means that there is no cost attri buted in that formula to the accounting services pro vided in the Department of Finance, to the auditin g service s I' ve mentioned, to the overhead , the rent attrib utable to the Portage Ave nue bui lding, that it is all confined to Page 66. Is that correct, that is, on the government si de? MR .

ORCHA RD: The costs , Page 66 , on Appropriation 9, a portion of them, that being required for Driver Licencing , are shared , but not every dollar being expended here is being shared with MPIC , only the dollars being expended which involve the Moto r Vehicle Branch in drive r licencing . MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr . Chairman, then does it mean that if the Estimates shown opp osi te 9. (

b) of $3 .815 milli on, if that were an actual, would that be the fig ure? That 's for the year about to end . MR . ORCHA RD: Not enti rely . MR . CHERNI ACK: Well, what else would there be in addition to that (

b) item? MR . ORCHA RD: Well, there would be a portion of the salaries contained in (a). MR . CHERNI ACK : Yes. Anything else? MR . ORCHA RD: Well, if buildin gs were rented out of the ci ty , they would be included in that . If they were to do with driver licencing and vehicle registra tion, those would be included in the costs to be shared by MPIC. MR . CHERNIACK: And they 'r e not shown on Page 66? MR . ORCHA RD: No . MR . CHERNIACK : They 'r e shown elsewhere , I pres ume . Estima tes? MR . ORCHA RD: Government Services ' Esti mate s. In the Minister 's MR . CHERN IACK : Government Services' Estim ates?

How about the salary of the Minister for Government Services? MR . ORCHA RD: You'll have to ask him, Mr . Chairman. - 1429 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . CHERNI ACK : Well , Mr . Chairman, what I would like to ask the Minister is that since they have developed a formula, they 'v e arrived at 45 -5 5 , can he produce , not now, it 's obvious he can't produce it now, can he on Monday let us have the accepted crit eria or the accepted categories of payments on both side s which will be recognized . Surely , that has been arrived at, otherw ise , is that why we have such a great di screp ancy between the two parties? MR . ORCHA RD: Well , Mr . Chairman, not that I want to detract from the Mem ber for St .

Johns in his efforts this afternoon, but I think the important obser vatio n to make here is that this formula was not arrived at unilaterally . This formula, 55 -4 5 was arrived at via negotiations between MPIC and the Motor Vehicle Branch .

They mutually agreed upon what costs were to be shared in each group 's operati ons , and what were not to be shared and they outlined to their mutual ag reement what costs they felt legitimately should be shared in terms of Motor Vehicle Branch costs , in te rms of MP IC cos ts, and they decid ed, after pooling their group of, whatever they may have been , their group of costs to each divi sion. They mutually decid ed , mutually decid ed, that a proper share of the cost allocation should be 55-45 versus the 80-20 which had previously dis crim inated against Moto r Vehicle Branch. MR .

CHERNIACK : I understand the Minister 's statement . He said it several time s; they'v e mutually agreed and I hope that 's correct, and, you know, we will have other opportunit ie s to explore that. But I want to know whether he is pre pared to te ll us what they agreed on. I understand they agreed on 45 -55. I want to know of what , and for that they would have to have agreed on certain cos ts. I don 't think the Insurance Corporation would have agreed to accept part of the cost of the Cabinet or part of the Minister 's costs. He says no. An in surance company would no t have agreed to accept that.

Well, surely , it should be available to us to know what they did agree on. Now, what is there that they agreed on , and as well, on the side of the Insurance Corporation? I unders tand that the Item (

b) Other Expenditu res includes the costs of the agents that are employed by this government, is that correct ; a commission paid to agents would be included under Other Expenditur es, is that correct , or doe s that come off the income? Let me just clarify , Mr . Chairman . As I understand it, if I send my cheque with an application for a licence to an insurance agent, I assume he deducts a certain portion of this commission and remits the balance. On the other hand , he might send the full amount and get paid the commmi ssion. Where does that show up , is it in revenue or is it in expendit ures? MR .

ORCHA RD: Agents • commissions are sh own, Mr. Chairman, under (b) (2) . MR . CHERNI ACK : Okay , and that means it 's shown as an expenditure , and I assu me also on the MPIC side , that 's a chargeable expenditu re. I said I assume that, I gue ss I sho uld have said , would I be correct in assuming that? I want the Minister to answer. Are the commi ssions that MPIC pays shown as a cost of which the province pays 55 perc ent? MR . ORCHA RD: Not in our appropriati on, Mr. Chairman. MR . CHERNIACK: Pardon. MR . ORCHA RD: Not in our appropriatio n, Mr . Chairman. MR . CHERN IACK : Mr .

Chairman , we 'r e talking about the formula , 55 -45 , of a cost ••• I'v e been spending all this time trying to find out what the cost is and what are the elements that make up that cost . I unders tand now that it 's 9. (

b) plus other things , like rents of buildings outside of governmnent-owned buildings . So I would say , wh at 's the cost on the MPIC side? MR . ORCHA RD: Well , now, I missed the Member for St . Johns comments there in the interim. MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for St . Johns maybe could repeat that ques tion. - 1430 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR . CHERNIACK : I'l l try , Mr . Chairman . We are told that the formula, 45 -55, was mut ually arrived at , which means to me , it was not imposed on eit her side . I' m using that word "imposed " by someb ody else and I hope that that stands that way , that it's mut ually agreed on that the cost should be shared 45 -55· My next question is, 44- 55 percent of what , and I'm trying to dete rmine on the government 's si de of what , and I' m told that it 's 9. (

b) plus certain other things , like rental of buil dings outside of government-owned bui ldings that are used for vehicle and driver registratio n. I should have said driver registratio n, because as I unders tand it now, vehicle registration is the respons ibility of the Insur ance Corporation and its costs are thrown in that sharing .

So I' m now looking at the sta tement of expenses incurred as reported by the Insurance Corporation and there , at least , I have a breakdown and, you know, I' d like to know whether these items are included in the insurance co mpanies' side of costs for which the govern ment is paying 55 per cent . So , I' m asking the Mini ster, do you have that , do you know what it is of their cost that you 'r e paying 55 percent of? MR .

ORCHA RD: We are paying 55 percent of MP IC's administrat ive costs in registering motor vehic les, which includes salary , admi nistration of that program , comput er time , supplies, office space if there is a spec ific rental paid out. MR . CHERNIACK: Commission? MR. ORCHA RD: No . We do not share in the commi ssions , nor does Autopac share in the payment of licensing commissions that we have to pay , licensing ••• MR . CHERNIACK: Mr .

Chairman, I thought the Minister said that the govern- ment 's side was 9.( b) , plus some other things , like outside rental • • I asked abou t commissi ons , and he said , "Commission is included under 9. (b) (2 ) • 11 MR . ORCHA RD: The 9. (

b) includes the flat fee that we pay our agents for lice nsing. That is not included in the cost -sharing . MR . CHERNIACK : It 's not included in the • • • Why isn 't it included , Mr . Chairman? Why is the government subs idiz ing that part of it? MR . ORCHA RD: I will attempt to explain this for the Member for St . Johns. MR . CHERNIACK: Good . MR . ORCHA RD: Before Autopac was on the scene , MVB paid agents a certain fee to write up a driver 's licence and registratio n. That has continued straig ht through with no sharing of that particular cost . MR. CHERN IACK : That's for a driver 's licence? MR .

ORCHA RD: We pay a flat fee of 20 cents on a driver 's licence and $1.2 0 on a registrati on, a flat fee. MR . CHERNIA CK: Is that in Winnipeg as well? I don't think Winnipeg had commissi oned agents, did it? MR . ORCHARD: By in Winnipeg, do yo u mean at 1075 Portage? MR . CHERN IACK : No , I' m talking about independent agents who receive commi ssions ; that 's what he 's talking about , 20 cents and some other ••• MR.

ORCHA RD: If the independent agent , regardless of whether he is in the ci ty or in the country , issues a driver 's licence, MVB pays him a flat fee of 20 cents; if he issues a registrat ion, MVB pays him a flat fee of $1.2 0. MR . CHERNI ACK : Mr . Chairman, be fore Insurance Corpora tion, were there any agents of the government in Winnipeg which rece ived a commission for licence registration s ? - 1431 -

Frid ay , 21 March , 1980 MR . ORCHA RD: No, prior to the inception of Autopac , there were no agents in Winnipeg . MR . CHERNIACK : That 's my point . I expected to hear that answer . It took a little while to get it . So that the Ministe r says that back when they paid 20 cents and $1. 20 , I think he said ; now what do they get paid - and that includes agents in Winnipeg that weren't paid before - what do they get now? MR . ORCHA RD: Twenty cents and $1.2 0. MR . CHERN IACK: They get the same , 20 cents or $1.20, only there are many more now that there were before . MR . ORCHA RD: registration.

Well, it used to be, prior to Autop ac, 60 cents for MR . CHAIRMAN: The Member for Crescentwood . I wonder if we could ju st change the pace here . The Chair is getting confused , I don't know about the Committee , and maybe the Chairman could st and a relief because he is really ••• The Member for Crescentwood. MR . STEE N: The Chairman wants a little bi t of a break from the line of quest ioning that we 'v e had . Getting back, Mr. Minist er , to the 45 and 55 per cent.

This is the admi nistratio n charge being broken down into two sections , the Public Insurance Corporation picking up the smaller of the two portions, of hand ling the moneys and the registratio n. And when you have a person or a department or a branch of a department handling this registratio n, naturally I would assume that you are not only building in wages of the people who actually handle them , but maybe a porti on of the supervis ory peo ple , a portion of their wages, like an Assistant Deputy ; maybe 10 percent of his wages is being charged to that .

Then there 's the wages of those people actually handling the process ; there 's the supplie s, equip ment , etc.; and a portion of the rent or the space that they 'r e occupying . What you are saying and trying to, I hope , get across the Member for St . Johns , is that there is a cost of doi ng business and that this is now di vided between the Motor Vehicle Registration Branch and the Public Insurance Corporation on a 45 /55 fee schedu le. It 's a formula that has been arrived at between your de partment and the Insurance Corporatio n. Am I correc t? MR . ORCHARD: That is correct . MR .

STEEN: And the Member for St . Johns is asking , what is that actual do llar figure , and you have given him the indication that perhaps by Monday your people can give the actual dollar figure . Again, is that correct , sir? MR . ORCHA RD: We are going to make that attempt, yes. MR . STEE N: So I don't, Mr . Chairman, know what further questioning, or why the Member for St . Johns would continue to go any further at this time . The Minister can't give you the actual dollar figures ; he hasn 't got them broken down for him yet .

He 's told you the formula ; you 'v e agreed that you accept the for mula -- (Interjecti on)-- Or you accept knowledge of the formula ; you may not agree with that split but you want to know the actual dollars and he can't give them to you today . So what point is there continuing to harp away at it? MR . CHERNIACK: Mr . Chairman, may I ju st help the Member for Crescentwood . The Minister undertook to give us the dollar figures.

What I was now probing for was to find out what are the nature of the costs that have been accepted as being costs which are shareab le , the nature of the costs, and if he would undert ake to give that, or had done so half an hou r ago , we would have saved half an hour because that 's what I am trying to find ou t. There is a formula ; we understand that . That formula appl ies to ce rtain nature types of expenditu res. MR . STEE N: You want to know what services qualify for those . - 1432 -

Friday , 21 March, 1980 MR . CHERNI ACK : Yes, exact ly . I thank the Member for Crescentwood. I wish he had been here half an hour ago. MR . ORCHARD: Mr . Chairman, I want to thank the Member for Crescentwood for casting light upon the Member for St . Johns' rambling line of questio ning. If he had asked me exactly what he wanted , he would have got an answer. MR. CHAIRM AN: The hour of 4: 30 having arrived , I am leaving the Chair for Private Members' Hour . Have a good weekend . We might see you next week. Committee rise. SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR.

CHAIRM AN, Abe Kovnats (R adisson): This Committee will come to order. I would direct the honourable members to Page 75 of the Main Estim ates , Resolution Number 100, Item 1. Executive Administra tion , (a)

(2) Salaries - the Honourable Minister . MR . RANSOM: Thank you , Mr. Chairman. MR. ENNS : Mr . Chairman, jus t prior to the adjou rnment hour for noon, I was prompted to ris e and make a few comments, largely because of the debate that had ensued between the comments made by the Honourable Member for Transcona. Mr .

Chairman, I appreciate that we have an opportu nity on this general item to talk about the affairs of the Department of Natural Resources and I was really con cerned that the honourable member would choose to use this occasio n to really demonstrate once again the kind of hang-ups that my friends opposite have . Mr . Chairman, he did not choose to talk about whether or not the resourc es were being properly extracted from this province . He did not choose to worry about the manner in which this government or this Minister is managing those resources.

He was not worried about how Abitibi was behaving in terms of its corporate responsi bilities to the people of Manitob a , whose resources they are and will always continue to be . It was sim ply wro ng, from his point of view, that private sector should continue to have an involvement in the resource deve lopment of this provinc e. Mr . Chairman, I' m going to make that comme nt from ti me to time du ring the course of the Sessi on.

I •m going to research these kind of comments that all members opposite make , because , you know, they pay a certain amount of lip service to what we call, talk about , a mixed ecGnomy . But if honourable members opposite will just read their own speeches over a period of time , over a year , you know, they will find that that 's not the case . Oh , Mr . Chairman, they make the kind of general observations about the desirability of support ing small business or some thing like th at , but when, Mr . Chairman, have you heard any favourable comment from members opposite that involved the private sector? So , Mr.

Chairman, when they talk about placing themselves, or parties putti ng themselves in doctrinaire positions , and if you want to talk about the kind of polarity that has happened in thi s House, it's the kind of a speech that was just given on this item by the Honourable Member for Transcona that simply demonstrate that . Mr . Chairman, in ot her words , there is no place for the private sector in resource development as far as members opposite are concerned. MR. FERGUSON : Or anywhere else. MR . ENNS : Well , Mr.

Speaker , that 's a very appropriate comment coming from the Member for Gladstone , because if you put them together ••• the other day it was the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet that said what we need is one oil company , you know. On another occas ion, if it 's a matter of finances or some thing like that , it will be the critic of Finance saying , what we need is one financial house.

When it comes to other source s, we know that in Education, they ch astize our Minister of Educatio n, our government , for having in a small way , contributed to the support of private and parochial schools in this province. - 1433 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 So , Mr. Chairman, if I can have your attention for a moment . I know that you are dist racted by the di stinguished company in the Speaker 's Gallery this after noon, but I do ask you , Mr . Chairman, to pay me the courtesy of your full and rapt attention while I am addressing this important ques tion. --( Interj ection )-- I happen to be lieve that your wife is very lovely too and she 's distractin g me right now, but . ord er . MR . CHAIRMAN: Order please . The Honourable Member for Logan on a point of MR . WILLIA M JENKINS (L ogan): Yes, Mr .

Chairman, I must ris e on a point of order in your defense , Sir . That it is not parliamentary okay to critic ize the Chair and I would ask the Minister to not cast reflections upon the Chair . MR. CHAIRM AN: Thank you very much . MR. ENNS : Mr . Chairman, let me hastily with draw any suggestion of chast iz ing you, Sir, in the Chai r. For a moment I thought that the honourable member was ri sing on a point of order because he thought Mr s. Kovnats was out of order by being with us this afternoon. But if that 's not the case, Mr .

Chairman, then I'll proceed with my philo sopical debate this afternoon on the subject matter at hand. Mr. Chairman, the ot her matter that prompted me to rise , just brie fly of course , was the very peculiar double standard disp layed by the Honourable Member for Transcona. Mr. Chairman, on the one hand, he chastiz ed this government, he chastize d the role of one , Harry Oppenheim er , who has investments in South Africa and has investments in this country , as being the kind of private investment , the kind of private involvement that we could do witho ut . Mr .

Chairman, I think he made that point very plain. Mr . Chairman , I have no intentions of protect ing one , Harry Oppenheimer , and /or his business and labour practices in other countries of this wo rld.B ut , Mr . Cha ir man , obvio us ly, in response to the Honourable Member for Minnedosa , it doesn't trouble the members opposite or the particular Member for Transcona at all to use and borrow his money and to pay him 29 percent interest if it 1 s called upon in today 's money terms. Mr . Chairman, I call that a double standard .

The Honourable Member for Trans cona suggested it was quite agreeable to use Harry Oppenheime r's ill begotten wealth to bui ld our hydro dams, but somehow, it was quite out of order and quite immoral to have that kind of an entrepreneur involved in business practices in the country . You know, Mr . Chairman, I call that a peculiar double standard , a peculiar double standard . And particularly , Mr . Chairman, if we 'r e talking about res ource s , and he was relating that to hydro .

It di dn't bother him at all ; doesn 't bother his moral ity, doesn 't bother any of the opposite membe rs' morality, to instal into our hydro plants Russian-b uilt turbine generators. Ah, the member smile s; but we 'r e talking about morality. He is worried and I worry . I' m worried about the rascist polici es of South Africa; I' m worried about the labour polici es of South Afr ica . But I can also tell the honourable member that those turbines were bui lt in factories by slaves, not in the 1800s, not in 1920 ; in 1950 and in 1960 and in 1970 .

And thousands , mi llions , died in the Gulads of Siberia , where those parti cular turbines come from. But that 's not a problem of morality for the Honourable Member for Transcona. No , as long as we put South African wine off the liquor lis ts, as long as we , you know, we select ively choose where we wish to wax indig nant. But, Mr. Chairman, I' m off the subje ct matter .

My problem with the Honour able Member for Transcona is that he , of all members , should have challenged this Minister as to how the private sector , with whom he has made a grievance, is going to in a responsible way extract the resources to the benefit of the people of Manitob a . He should have been concerned about how the people of Manitoba are being guaranteed of a legitimate and fair return for those resour ces. That , surely , is the questi on.

Now, if the honourable member is saying , as he really said, that there is no way that the private secto r can be involved in the extrac tion of those resources , that 's fine, we accept that but, Mr . Chairman, then let it not be said that it is those of us ·on our side that choose to take such extreme doctrinaire positi ons . - 1434 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 Mr · Chairman, the his tory of the Conservative Party , the success ive Conserva tive governments since the formation of this province has been one of a true appreciation of the mixed economy . Bu t, Mr . Chairman, I challenge you and I will , I' m doing the resear ch . I challenge yo u, I challenge yo u, Mr . Chairman, or any members opposite in the course of the last year, the last two years , that they can sh ow me in Hansard a statement that recognizes the role of the private sector in anything in this provi nce. Mr . Chairman, it 's not there , it 's not there .

Aside from the kind of general, you know, mothe rhood type statements that says , 11Well, certainly, we 'r e in favour of a mixed economy ; certainly we want to do some thing for the small busine ss." And I think it was my leader or somebody else suggested in this House the problem members opposite have is, when does the small business become a med ium business , and when does it become • MR . CHAIRMAN: To the Honourable Minister , I would suggest that if there could be some reference to natural resource s, the subj ect u nder di scussion, it would be appreciated .

The Honourable Member for ••• on a point of order . MR. WI LSON PARASIUK (Transcona): In order to aid the Minister in his re search , ye s, it is. No , I' m asking •• MR. CHAIRM AN: The Honoura ble Member for Transcona. MR .

PARASIUK : Yes, I would like the Minister , in doing his research , to look into questions that were asked by myself and other members on this side of the House with re spect to price fixing by large co mpanies, and the selling of gasoline , which is a natural resource - price fixing that was taking place a yea r or two ago - and we asked about the impact of that price fixing by large companies on small independent retailers of gasoline , because we were interested in the position of the small independent retailers of gasoline for small bus inessmen and, in fact, are being threatened by the large multinational oil interests.

Would you check into that as part of your research? MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Minister. MR . ENNS : Mr . Chairman, in responding to the natural resource from Trans cona , I want to indicate to him that, of course, is precisely what I was making . They will very cleverly, you know, very cleverly from time to time make the mothe rhood kind of statements in support of a sector of the private business, again carefully weighi ng where they are challenging big corporate busin ess . You know, just .so attackable in support of the physical small business or independent bus iness . Bu t, Mr .

Chairman, I bide by my word s, I will have and will be re search ing the statements made, particularly by the Leader of the Party, particu larly by the former Minister of Industry and Commerc e in this re spect , and will document the absolute lack of concern, of support , for the private sector in the economy of this provi nce. And coming back to the qu estion be fore us , Mr .

Chairman, Natural Resources , that was demonstrated this morning, just prior to the noon hour adjournment, and in the address by the Honourable Member for Transcona, which did not for one minut e, not for one minute did he worry about how the Mini ster was handling the department . He did not for one minute worry about how certain re sponsi biliti es, ce rtain agreements were going to be carried out to the benefit of the people of Manitob a , in this provi nce. He did not worry for one minute as to whether the level of return to the prov ince and to the people of Manitob a was sati sfactory or not.

These, Sir , are the legitimate ki nd of things that I would suspect from honourable member s. What we got , Mr . Chairman, was an harangue of Harry Oppenheim er. That 's what we go t, an harangue of Harry Oppenheimer . Well , God bless Harry Oppenheimer , wherever he is. If he 's had a few problems in his life , I •m sure that they probably are de served . A MEMBER : Who 's Harry Oppenheimer? - 1435 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR. ENNS : Well , I don't know, but the Honourable Member for Transcona raised that matte r as a se rious concern in the Estimates of my colleague , the Minister of Mines and Natural Resourc es, Mr . Chairman. MR . ENNS : Mr .

Cha irman, in add iti on, of course , what the honourable mem bers should recognize, that within the space of a few short - well, I call it months because the legislation was only passed last session - the turn-around that has taken place in this province, in terms of exploratio n, in terms of real potential forward movement in developin g those resour ce s, that is not bei ng recog ni zed . That is not being recognized . Mr .

Chairman, I said that at the time the former Minister of Mines and Natural Resources introduced those confiscatory taxes into this legislatio n, and I said, I don 't question the ability of the public secto r to mine for nickel , to explore for oil, to develop our resour ces. There 's no question that we have got the brains or the ability of doing that . The difficulty is, that we do not have the politi cal courage , in a free and open society , to extract the kind of money - the tremendous amou nts of money - the hi gh ri sk money , that don't show immedi ate returns .

We will always find other areas to put those moneys , into and governments of all des cri ptions will be under pressure to attend to the immed iate needs, the soc ial needs of the day , as we were faced within the Department of Education and at our meeting with School Division No . 1 at noon today , as the Minister of Health will face them ever y day . So the decision of putting $50 , $60 , $80 million into one dry hole after ano ther dry hole, just is not made ; and, Mr . Cha irman, that is precisel y what happ en ed . That is precisely what happened .

The oil com panies just si mply said , it wasn't a question of whether the oil is there or not there, it's just that we created a climate that they weren 't prepared to look for and operate in, and so they simply didn 't operate in it. Well , I' 11 let the Honourable Minister - and I' m sure he will , I' m sure that that will highli ght one of his presentatio ns in the course of his Estima tes . The fact is that the kind of encouraging activity that 't taking place in this province - not just in oil in southern Manitoba , but throughout our more important mineral belt of the north , Mr.

Chairman, the monies, the returns to the people of Manitoba are going to be substantially greater as a result of this Minist er 's and this government 's polic ies. Now, Mr . Chairman, I accept the proposition that the Honourable Member for Inkster can argue that point . Mr. Chai rman, that is precisely my point . That is the kind of argument that the Member for Transcona should have argued about , but instead we got the real .. • I •m sorry , it's jus t that you accuse us of this kind of doct rinaire , you know, clicheism.

I ju st want the Honourable Member for Trans cona to recognize how well he suited that descripti on of a socialist in his com ments before the noon-hour adj ournment .

No concern about the management of the resour ce s; no concern about the level of profita bility of those resources as far as the people of Manitob a were concerned ; no concern about the techniques that are app lied because aft er all, it •s a very im portant facet of the Minist er 's responsi bi lity that we don't - whether it 's public or private - that we do n't mine our resou rces in such a way that those that are renewable are no longer there for future generations ; that the Minister is charged with the responsibility of manag ing those resources in such a way that as yet unborn generations of Manitobans will be in a position to enjoy them.

That wasn't a concern of the Honourable Member for Transcona. The concern was solely the basis that the private sect or . • • his particular hang-up, of course , was the Abit ibi Paper Company - was involved in a joint venture , you might say , Mr .

Cha irman, because it is a joint venture with the province. rt is a jo int venture with the Department of Mines and Natural Resourc es, that agrees under the management contract to manage , to supervise the harvesting of those resources in such a way that Manitob ans have jobs , in such a way that all Manitobans get a return from that resour ce, and in such a way that that resource will continue to be there for years and years and years to come , truly renewable .

But honourable memb ers opposite, their only concern is that some wicked, some private enterprise, particu larly if it happens to be a bi g company , is involved in it. Well, Mr . Cha irman, let me tell the Honourable Member for Transcona, that great natural resource from Transcona - sir , you told me to re fer to Natural Resources - 1436 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 every once in a while , so I' m following your admonition. Mr .

Chairman, that is the kind of doc trinaire position that honourable members - I' m not sure that they 'r e always aware of, you know, I'm not sure that they are consciously aware of what they are presenting to members on this side of the House , but I want to assure him that I' m aware of it , that I will research carefully the speeches made by the Leader of the Oppositi on, research carefully the speeches made by some of the other spokesmen from time to time on matters of economic and industrial de velop ment, and I will find what I know is there , because while none of us are perfect attenders in this House , I do attend in this House fairly often and I find most speeches contribut ing and interestin g .

And it 's from that position that I make that general statement now, that if members opposite really researched their speeches over the past course of a few yea rs, they will find out how one-sided they are , how little they are concerned about that very important - in fact , Mr . Chairman, that 's a point of argument between us - we say it is the most important feature of our economy , namely , the private secto r . MR . CHAIRM AN: The Honor able Leader of the Oppositio n. MR . HOWARD PAWLEY (S elkirk ): Mr .

Chairman, I believe that we have probably touch ed upon one of the most basic di fferences that di vide government from the oppositio n. I be lieve that the most basic di fference does involve the development of our natural resour ce s; admitte dly there is a dis tinct and a clear di fference of philo sophy and app roach . Mr .

Chairman, I listened to the Minister speak in pertaining to the future benefits of our natural resource s, but I could not he lp but reflect upon the Cabi net of which he was a member , which undertook the agreement pertaining to CFI , the development of our natural resource, the forestry resourc e, in that respe ct, and the concessions that were made to Churchill Forest Industrie s, that it would be the public - the public that would contribute the roads, the public that would contribute the re-forestra tion, the public that would contribute the fire-fighting - and in return, an international private outfit reaped the benefits .

That is the definition by which the Minister arrives at insofar as providing the benefits of our natural resources to the people of the province of Manitoba . Mr . Chairman, if that is the definition that the Minister and his group use , then we want none of it , none of it . Mr . Chairman, I said that this was probably the most central issue . Only a few moments ago , both government members and opposi tion members have been confronted with genuine concerns by trustees and by parents pertain ing to education costs.

Every day , we are confronted with demands pertain ing to health costs and the need for improved servic e, the need for improved hous ing. But, Mr . Chairman, until we ensure that we undertake a program of action to realize a maximizat ion of benefit from our natural resource s, we will be unable to undertake the type of social benefits that the people of Manitoba expect and properly deserve . Natural resource policy must be an important policy an area of direc ti on. And , Mr .

Chairman, it 's interestin g how, when my colleague , the Member for Transcona, dealt with respect to the role of mult inationals and their involvement in the province of Manitoba pertain ing to the development of our natural re sources, the Member for Lakeside, the Minister of Public Works, del iberately chose to accuse the Member for Transcona of attacking private enterpris e . It 's in teresting how thin-skinned and how sensit ive honourable members are across the way to need reference to the multinationals and their role in the province of Mani toba .

They equate the role of the mult inational with the role of the small private entrepreneur. They equate the maximum benefit of our natural resourc es with the involvement of the mult inatio nal corporation in the development of our natural resources in the provinc e of Manitoba . To them and their doctrinaire blinkers, there is no room for the de velopment of the public sector, and the participation of the public sector . I just regret , Mr .

Chairman, that we cannot ensure that there is a policy that is developed, that is prepared to use the public as well as the private sect or ; and to use the public secto r in order to ensure that there is the exploratio n, there is the development and the return to the public of that which they justl y de serve. The Natural Resources of this province belong to one mi llion Manitobans , not to a few in Manitoba , not to a few outside Manitoba. - 1437 -

Friday , 21 March, 1980 And I only wish the Minister of Natural Resourc es - and I know it 's too much to expect - but some day we shall have a Minister of Natural Resources again in the province of Manitoba that will recognize that the natural resourc es of this prov ince ought to be developed , not for the benefit of a few, not for the benefit of privilege , but for the benefit of all Manitob ans , to ensure maximum return . And, Mr . Chairman, I do not back away from this iss ue, because this is a most central issue I believe that is confronting Manitobans .

All the promi ses that we can make pertaining to educatio n, health and other improvements will fall by the way if we are not prepared to ensure that we demonstrate some courage and initia ti ve in respect to the techniques that are used to develop resour ces.

The Member for Inkster and the former government were prep ared to utilize equity involveme nt, joint equity involv ement, in the development of our natural re sourc es ; were prepared to ut ilize the public sector in the development of natural resource s; were pre pared to increase the royalties in order to ensure that our natural resources were develop ed . And , Mr . Chairman, the effort that the Minister for Public Works tries to leave an impressi on that some way or other there 's been a turnabout in mining develop ment in the province of Manitob a , Mr . Chairman, is a total and complete false hood .

And the Minist er of Public Works is aware that it is a falsehood . Mr . Chairman, I look forward to the day when we will be able to undertake the type of thrust whi ch Saskatchewan is embarked upon, to ensure for example that the potash resources of that province are develo ped to a signifi cant degree by the public . To be able to - and I pay tribut e - pay tribute to the courage and the thrust of the Saskatchewan government in undertaking that . That would not have happened under a Conservative government in the province of Saskatchewan. Yet we find now, Mr .

Chairman , because of that thrust , an increas ing perc entage of the budget in the province of Saskatchewan is not raised by taxatio n, but is raised as a result of the inflow of revenue s from the potash and other publicly developed natural resources in that province. That 's a direction we should be going .

Not to increase taxatio n, whether it be at the local or at the provincial level upon those who are least able to afford it , but to ensure that those natural resourc es that belong to us all are used for the benefit of us all; that they are kept in this province for our benefit; not to pur sue the route of CFI and the precedent we have there . Not to proceed by way of the precedent we have in respect to Abitibi , where small contractors had to come on bended knee - talk about private enterprise , talk about encouraging private enterprise - what did this government do in respect to Abit ibi?

Snall private contractors now have to go to Ab iti bi on bended knee to obtain from Abitibi concessi ons in order to develop the timber resources of eastern Manitoba . Th at 's their idea of private enterpris e , Mr . Chairman, to turn increasing benefits over to the Abitibis and to the multination als. Mr . Chairman, there is so much that we can undertake . And I want to just add a further comment .

Not only do I beli eve that we must es tablish a policy to ensure the benefits of natural resources or return to the provincial jurisdict ions , but I belie ve that it is increasingly, or ought to be increasi ngly apparent that the fragmentation of have and have-not provinces and provincial jurisdiction pertain ing to natural resource policy , is contrary to the best interests of Canadians.

I would hope that the government across the way would take a determined posi tion vis- a-vis Loughheed in an attempt to continue to monopolize increasing amounts of the wealth of this country because the resources happen to be in the province of Alberta. The resources of Canada belong to all Canadians, not only to Alb ertans , but to all Canadians whether they be in Prince Edward Island or B.c. And I say to government members across the way, just because a fellow colleague is the Premier of the province of Albert a, be prepared to stand up to him.

Be pre pared to say that those oil and natural resources in the province of Alberta ought to be shared equitably across the length and breadth of this land. Don 't be simply little "pups " following along behind Peter Lougheed in Alberta . That 's all that we 'v e be en observin g for the last 18 months by way of policy from the First Minister of this province and from the Minister responsible for Natural Re source s . -- ( Interjecti on)-- You 'r e not taking a lead on behalf of Manitoba .

The lead that you provide and the example that you provide on behalf of Manitobans is a lead in the interests of your Alberta colleagues. --( Interjecti on)-- Mr . Chairman, let me make this commitm ent. - 1438 -

Friday , 21 March , 1980 MR. CHAIRM AN: Order please. Order please . I would hope the honourable members would give the courtesy of whoever is standing in his place speaking and being recognized by the Chair, the opportunity to complete whatever he has to say , he or she has to say. The Honourable Leader of the Oppositi on. MR . PAWLE Y: Mr .

Chairman , I' m glad the Member for Minnedosa raised the ques tion of Saskatch ewan, because I want to assure the Member for Minnedosa that when a New Democratic Party government is elected to the province of Manitoba , we will not be "pups" trailing behind Allan Blakeney in Saskatchewan. We will dif ferentiate from Allan Blakeney of Saskatchewan pertaining to this particular issue as to the distribution of the benefits of natural resourc es. MR . CHAIRM AN: The Honourable Member for Minnedosa on a point of order? MR . BLAKE: No , I wanted to ask a ques tion of the Leader of the Oppos iti on.

I merely ask him what price Allan Blakeney in Saskatchewan was charging for a barrel of oi l, and he goes into a great tirade about Saskatchewan • MR. CHAIRM AN: Order please. Opposition accede to a question? Order ple ase . Would the Leader of the MR . PAWLE Y: I don't quite dis cern the questio n. Was it a point of order , Mr . Chairman? MR . CHAIRMAN: No , it was a ques tion. -- ( Interj ection)- The Honourable Leader of the Oppositi on. MR . PAWLEY: Mr . Chairman, what the Member for Minnedosa - and I thank hi m - has done, is really proved the point which I was making .

The member thought by raising the question of Allan Blakeney in Saskatchewan, that some way or other we would back away, that we would place our party ideological bent ahead of the interests of Manitobans . But, Mr . Chairman, we are not prepared to do that. If Allan Blakeney toddles along with Peter Lougheed in oil resource policy, it doe sn 't mean that Manitob a ought to toddle behind Saskatchewan and the province of Alberta in resource policy . Mr .

Cha irman, what is important , and what honourable members miss across the way , is that if we are to have a heri tage in Manitoba , a herita ge for our children and our children 's child ren, we must be prepared to utilize the private sector where it 's feasible , the public sect or where necessary in order to ensure that natural resources are developed for this province.

Unfortunately we have a government that has ideolo gical blinkers ; a government which, when a member raises a quest ion of mult i nationals , immediat ely in a knee-jerk sort of fashion, they consider that to be an attack on the entire private secto r . Mr . Chairman, what we need is some leadership in this province and we 'r e not getting that leadership . And I regret to say that until that leadership is pro vided , Manitobans are not going to enjoy the soc ial benefits that are needed in this province at the present time. MR .

CHAIRM AN: Would the Honourable Minister care to bring in his staff at this time? We are on the next item . We will proceed and they can come in when ever they arri ve. The item under discussion is 2. Salaries--pass - the Honourable Member for Rupertsland . MR . HARVEY BOSTROM (R upertsland ): Thank you , Mr . Chairman. I would like to make a few comments regarding some of the contributions of the Honourable Minister of Government Servic es.

I found it rather humorous in places, in the fact that he said that they recognized the public secto r has the abili ty and the means to manage and develop and harvest the resources of the province of Manitoba , but he candidly admits that his party and his government doesn •t have the wil l, the political will , to do what is rig ht and a logical thing to do . - 1439 -

MR . CHAIRM AN: MR . RAN SOM : dealing now with Adminis tratio n. Friday , 21 March, 1980 The Honourable Minister on a point of order . Mr . Cha irman, my understanding, Mr . Chairman, is that we are the item of Salaries under the Executive and Ge neral MR . CHAIRMAN: To the Honourable Minister , that 's my understanding also. I was listening to the honourable member to see whether he was going to be getting into, with a

preamble , into this particular item . To that point , I hadn 't quite es tablishe d in my mind whether he was in order or out of order. I would suggest to the Honourable Member for Rupertsland that the item under discu ss ion is Salaries. I' m not ruling you out of orde r, I' m jus t suggesting that it is under discu ss ion. The Honourable Member for Rupertsla nd. MR . BOSTROM: Thank you , Mr . Chairman.

I understand , from this secti on, that we are talking about the general administration of the departme nt, which relates to the philosop hy and direction that the department is taking, and while we ' re not discu ssing every do llar which we are dis cuss ing under this item, cer tainly general comme nts have been made all morning and this afternoon on this item. I would expect to be able to follow that precedent and be able to continue to make general comme nts on the policy • • • MR . CHAIRM AN: To the honourable member, what was carrying on up until now was a reply to the Minister 's opening remarks .

We are now under investigation of the dep artment, and I would hope that the honourable membe r would stick to the Salarie s, which is under discu ss ion. The Honourable Member for Rupertsland . MR . BOSTROM: Mr . Chairman, ju st on that point , I don 't recall us having passed an item as such, and therefore I' m following in the general reply to the Minister 's opening remarks . MR . CHAIRMAN: To the honourable member , the item was not passed , which was (

l) Minister 's Compensation. I had moved to 2. Salaries, which was the item under di scuss ion. We have not passed any ite ms up until this point . The discussion has been reply to the Ministe r 's opening remarks . We are now under investig ation of the Department of Natural Resourc es, which comes under the heading, 2. Salari es. The Honourable Member for Rupertsla nd. MR . BOSTROM: Mr .

Chairman, I believe that I would be in order , then, to discu ss the general policy thrust of the government under this secti on , since we are talking about the admi nistration of the department and the admi nistration of the department is that whi ch I would beli eve is carried out by the Deputy Min ister , who come s under this secti on, and he in fact would be carrying out the polio ies as es tablish ed by the Minister of the dep artment , and that reflects the general policy of the government . MR. CHAIRM AN: I will allow you to carry on. MR . BOSTROM: So , Mr .

Chairman, I believe that I can dis cuss things like the policy of the government with respect to the development of natural resour ces, and one of those polici es is their admi tted lack of political will , their lack of will to do those thi ngs which we believe on this side of the House to be neces sary . This opposition group believes that we shoul d be develop ing our resourc es in such a way as to maximize the returns to the people of Manitoba .

We believe this government is not doing that , has reneged on its respons ibilities even in those areas where they had the opportunity to continue to do those things that we were doi ng. Let me give you a few examples. One is the area of the Abitibi agreement which was referred to earlier. We have a case in poi nt where the government had an opportunity to continue an agreement which was in place, whereby the province was getting a fairly substant ial return from that resource . They went about and - 1440 -

Friday , 21 March, 1980 negotia ted a new agreement whereby they reduced the amount of revenue to the province of Manitob a very substantially , and even more ser ious than that , gave over the control of that resource to this company , which has made it very di ffi cult for the small business people in the area. We hear the memb er 's comment about this party and our side of the House not being concerned about the small business peop le . Well, Mr . Cha irman, we have expressed greater concern and interest on behal f of small business people in this province than their group has in office. Mr .

Chairman, it is obvious from this case in point , with the Abitibi Paper Company, that the Conservative Government had no concern expressed , and has shown no concern for the small operators in the forest indus try when they si gned an agreement whereby they were giving control of the east side resour ces, forest resource s , to the Abiti bi Paper Company . They showed no concern for the small operato r who is trying to make a busines s; and I might add , Mr .

Chairman, many of these small operators are farmers who operate a forestry business in the winter season to sup plement their income from the meagre farm income which they are able to receive from operating small farms. I think it is regrettable that this government and the Progressive Conservative Mini ster of this dep artment saw fit to ignore that group , and to place all of their interests with the multinational corporati on, the Ab itibi Paper Company . Mr . Chairman, that company does not need the support , does not requir e the sup port , of a government to further their interests .

They are plenty powerful enough on their own without needing a big brother government to look after them. Mr . Chairman, that 's what we have in this province at the present time . We have a Progre ssive Conservative Party in power that is not prepared to protect the in tere sts of the di sadvantaged in society ; They are not pre pared to protect the interests of the independent family farm ; they are not prepared to protect the interests of the family and small business people in this province. They are only prepared to protect the interests of the large corporate interes ts .

And I use the example of Abi tibi because it relates direct ly to this Minister . We can refer also to the general policy this government has shown towards min ing, where they have reduced the royalities that are coming to the people of Manitoba. They have actually reduced the revenues from the mining sector , without any need to do so. They have not attracted any people into this province by doing that . --(I nterjec tion )-- Well, you announced it in the Hous e; you made a big production of reducing the revenues from the mining sect or .

And then you had your meetin gs with the Winnipeg Schoo l Board and you told them you have no more money• Well , Mr . Chairman, you made your own nests --( Interjecti on)-- I' m sorry , I' m sorry , I attributed to the Chairman something which he didn 't do himse lf. But the government has certainly created a problem for itsel f. --( Interj ection)-- We will see what they hatch. Mr .

Chairman, in re ference to the co mments by the Minister of Government Ser vice s, he said they wanted to get a fair return from their resource s, and yet he doe sn •t seem to realize - he claims that he hasn 't spent all his time in the Legislature ; I suggest he hasn 't even looked very carefully at the actions which his government has taken. Because not only has it been accompli shed by his government to reduce the revenues from the resources of Manitoba , but they have even bragged about it .

The First Minister will get up in his place and say what wonderful thi ngs they have done by reducing the taxation on the mining companies and reducing the taxation to the Ab ititi Paper Company. He claims that we had a gun to their head when we were in government. Well, Mr . Chairman, we were finally gett ing a fair return from that co mpany , and this government has returned the royalty rate to the 1925 level. can you te ll me what other company, business, family, individu al , anybody , who is able to have a price in 1980 that is the same as that which was established in 1925?

I suggest there is. -- ( Interjectio n)-- Crow rate , yes . Well , Mr . Chairman, the honourable members want to abolish the Crow rate too . They seem to be exhibi ting an approach to resource development in this prov ince, Mr . Chairman, which is very inflexible . And I call it inflexible because they only want to allow for private development , and even within that concept they are inflexible , because they seem to only want to allow the major large interests to be involved in that private developm ent.

They are not concerned about the small independent fish ermen ; they are not concerned about the small independent - 1441 -

Frid ay , 21 March , 1980 company working in the forestry sector ; they 'r e not concerned about the community groups that are operatin g within the wild rice area . They are at the present time I believe , changing the policy on wild rice so as to allow greater leasing by individuals who really don't require the resourc e, people who are already making a good income from other source s. And certainly in the mining areas, as I have already said , they are putting all their cards in the same deck with the large corpo

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-4-22b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 4th hansardpdf 22b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6936097f372d5ac2d1f065ce9626068f192390e1

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