Manitoba Hansard — 4 May 1987 (Sitting 40A, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-40a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 4 May, 1987. Time - 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Phill ips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Pres enting Reports by Standing and Sp ecial Commi ttees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I have a report for the House on the results of the First Ministers' Meeting on the Constitution which took place last Thu rsday in Meech Lake, Quebec.

Before I left for the meeting, I said I hoped to be able to report progress to the House when I returned. I'm pleased to say that I can report progress, substantial progress. I feel priviledged and proud to have been able to represent Manitoba at what turns out to be an historic meeting. All 11 First Min isters reached agreement in princi ple, unanim ous ly, on a set of constitutiona l changes which will make our country stronger and more unified. When the First Mini ster announced the results of our meeting, he said it had been "A good day for Canada." He was right; and it was an equally good day for Manitoba.

The constitutional changes which were approved in principle at Meech Lake went a long way toward meeting the concerns we'd expressed prior to the meeting. Provinces will have greater input in some aspects of federal policy-making and in the make-up of federal institutions. But, overall, the power and authority of the national government has not been compromised. I will table - and I have already tabled - copies of the unanimous agreement in principle with the text of this statement.

Before the conference, I advised the House that our greatest concern had been the threat of major, new limits on the Federal Government's "spending power" - that is, its ability to in troduce new national programs, particularly in areas of provincial jurisdiction - the kinds of programs which, as I said before the meeting, are especially important to smaller provinces such as ours. Such proposals were tabled at the meeting, but after some discusson, they were set aside.

The spending power change which was agreed upon, though signif icant, should not prevent a Federal Government from introducing new national programs with strong national standards. That was a major accomplishment, and I believe Manitoba can share in the credit for that outcome.

Under the new provision, provinces will be able to opt out of future national shared cost programs in return for "reasonable compensation," but only if those provinces undertake their own in itiatives or programs in ways that are "compatible with national objectives." Granted, there appears to be considerable flexibili ty in those words, but the First Min isters' intent will be clarified in the next few weeks, when the formal, legal draft is prepared.

Our understanding of the agreement is that it will still make possible the kind of federal initiative that led to Medicare - and that it should not stand in the way of early implementation of a national day care program. There should be no doub t that the Federal Government will continue to exercise considerable leverage by playing a major

part in defining what it regards as "reasonable compensation" and what it regards as "compatible with national standards." The other, large concern for Manitoba before the meeting was a proposal that Quebec, or any province or group of provinces, be granted a special veto over future constitutional changes. Several other provinces shared that concern - and the agreement, in principle, reflects that fact. Under the agreement, every province is treated equally. Every province will have an equal say in shaping new key institutions.

That, too, was a major accomplishment - and, again, I believe Manitoba can fairly accept some of the credit for that result as well. Our one regret here is that the agreement in principle would make the entry of new provinces subject to unanimous agreement by all existing provinces and the Federal Government, rather than by way of the general amending formula of seven provinces with 50 percent of the population. If there were a willingness on the part of the other participants at last week's conference to deal further with that concern in the coming weeks, I would certainly support such an effort.

Another provision in the agreement - the provision that apparently is seen as most important to the Government of Quebec - is formal recognition that "Quebec constitutes within Canada a distinct society." That recognition will complement the constitutional provision recognizing the multicultural nature of the country, which became part of the Constitution five years ago. The agreement in principle also contains provisions regarding immi gration and the Supreme Court - and both offer all provinces better input.

On immigration, the agreement offers provinces the prospect of negotiating federal-provincial agreements on immigration policy. The provision on the Supreme Court commits the Government of Canada to selecting Supreme Court Justices from lists of nomi nees to be forwarded by the provinces. Finally, the agreement in principle deals with what has been called the "Second Round" - arrangements to ensure that formal federal-provincial consultations on the Constitution and the economy will occur annually, and cannot be set aside indefin itely, at the discretion of some future Prime Minister.

The fi rst of the new rou nd of Constitutional Conferences will be held before the end of 1988 and 1565

Monday, 4 May, 1987 will include, on its agenda, potential changes to the Senate, fisheries policy, and other agreed-upon matters. That leaves the door open for our government and others to continue to press for strengthened constitutional guarantees for equalization and for regional development. We also intend to keep pressing to ensure that the issue of aboriginal rights remains a priority in upcoming constitutional discussions. There is an argument that the agreement in principle will make changes to the Senate harder to achieve. That remains to be seen.

Obvious ly, it was satisfactory to the Premier of the Province of Alberta, who has been the strongest proponent of a particular kind of change - the so-called "Triple E" proposal. My reading of the situation is that there is a consensus among First Min isters that the current Senate needs to be changed, and that we should get on with the job of assessing alternatives to prepare our first conference on that subject. If the attitude around the conference table last Thursday stays the same, I believe, we could well see some changes at that time.

The agreement in principle specifies that until such time as amend ments regarding the Sena te are accomplished, the Federal Government shall make its appointments to the existing Senate from lists of nomi ness provided by the relevant Premiers. I hope that this new, interim procedure - if it remains in effect for any length of time - will raise the overall calibre of appointments. While there have been a few fi rst-rate Senate appointments in recent years, they have been the exception, rather than the rule.

Within the next few days, we expect the Federal Government to set out a work plan for preparing the draft constitutional resolution and to suggest a date for the First Minis ters' meeting on this subject. As the Meech Lake communique stated, we expect that meeting to be held "within weeks." Although preparing the resolution in "Constitutional Language" will involve substantial work - and potentially significant disagreements - I believe the commitments at Meech Lake were firm and will hold.

Once the resolution has been agreed to by First Ministers, it will be put before the Parliament of Canada and the Provincial Legislatures for their consideration. Here in Manitoba, the deliberations on the resolution will inv olve the public hearing process which is now a part of our procedures for constitutional amendments. As I said before the meeting last week, there hasn't yet been an opportunity for detailed public debate on the constitutional changes and their importance to national unity. Now, the debate is under way, and the direction so far has been constructive.

In part, that is attributable to a growing recognition of the impo rtance to Canada of full partnership of the 6.5 million people of the Province of Quebec. The debate has also been constructive because of the leadership demonstrated by the Prime Min ister of Canada on this issue, and by his colleague, Senator Lowell Murray. I believe the Prime Min ister deserves to be commended. Fina lly, the debate on this issue has started in a positive way because of the goodwill of all Provincial Premiers and - let me emphasize once more - their unanimous support for our agreement in principle.

Madam Speaker, last Thursday's agreement marked a historic breakthrough for our country. And, it was achieved without the kind of divisions that have wasted so much time and energy in past years. Now, we can and should get on with the job of dealing with the urgent economic and social policy issues facing our country: Agriculture; Western Diversification; Tax Reform; Day Care; Aboriginal Rights. And - as we can do so with added momentum - and more, clear evidence of what can be accomplished when there is genuine cooperation between the Federal and the Provincial Governments.

Last week's agreement proved, again, that basic fairness - to all provin ces - is one of the keys to nation building. It is a lesson that I hope won't be lost on the Federal Government in the months and the years ahead. Thank you, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I thank the Premier for that statement and report on the accomplishments of the Meech Lake, First Min isters' Conference on the Constitution.

I'm sure that the Premier will un derstand that we were looking forward eagerly to his report when we read the weekend newspapers that said such things, such as, "Pawley to the PM, all is forgiven", and, "Mulroney Gets Top Marks for Quebec Accord". We certainly wanted to see whether or not the air at Meech Lake had had a dramatic affect on the Premier's outlook or whether, indeed, it was the charm of the Prime Minister that led to the new approach, the Irish charm that the Premier has taken pokes at in the past, obviously can be appreciated even by a New Democratic Premier.

Madam Sp eaker , certainly the Meech Lake Conf erence is to be welcomed for a numb er of achievements. First and foremost, the fact that the disparate views and priorities of 10 separate provin ces, and the National Government in Ottawa, still allowed a consensus, and indeed an agreement in principle, that was supported by all those First Minis ters in attendance, and that has to be a remarkable achievement in today's circu mstances with the various views, and certainly the different interests across the country.

We certainly look forward to the details contained in the legal draft as to how all of the agreements in principle will take shape and form, that is to be voted upon here in the form of a constitutional amendment resolution to be put before our House. We were pleased, as well, Madam Speaker, to know that overall the power and authority of the national government has not been compromised.

All of us, believing in the federal system of government which we have, believe that to be an important objective and we're pleased that that has not been compromised, or indeed, has not been affected as a result of these agreement. 1566 We'll look forward, of course, to learning about the mechanics of the operation of the so-cal led "constitutional veto" that's been given to all provinces,

Monday, 4 May, 1987 and be interested in knowing how that is to work, and to continue to maintain an opportunity to have our democratic form of government that we have under our Constitution at the present time in Canada. Madam Speaker , we're glad that the Premier has shown some flexibility with respect to reform of the Senate. In leaving our province last Wednesday, he seemed to ind icate that abolition was the only card that he was prepared to place on the table.

Madam Speaker, we hope that he will continue to show this flexibility in dealing with the principle of Senate Reform that has obviously been agreed to by the other First Ministers. Madam Speaker, I'm in terested to see the Premier's response to his expectation that the province, being able to submit names for future appointments to the Senate until reform is achieved will, in his words, raise the overall calibre of appointments.

So, Madam Speaker, given this government's track record in appointme nts to boards of Cr own corporations that have squandered tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars over the past four years, I don't think we share his optimism that that is going to raise the overall calibre of appointments to the Senate. Madam Speaker, I can tell the Premier and his colleagues that we, on this side, are optimistic that the grounds for consensus on a formaf legal agreement appear to be solid and appear to give us a great deal of hope for the future.

We look forward to the public hearing process, the opportunity to debate and discuss all of the proposals when they become in their final legal form.

We look forward to dealing with many of the major issues that trouble us, both here in Manitoba and ac;:ross the country; not only economic development and the opportunity for future growth in our province, deficit reduction, the commitment to quality health care that all of us would like to see, but obvio usly, the changes that we'll see us continue to be an equal partner with all of the other provinces across the coun try, as we look forward to the future with optimism. So we thank the Premier for that presentation and we look forward to future opportunities to discuss and debate all the details.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Mi nis ter of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Yes, Madam Speaker, I'd like to table the Annual Report for the Manitoba Oil and Gas Corporation for the year ended 19 86 and, while so doing, I'd like to thank members opposite for their cooperation in reviewing the draft of this report before the Economic Development Comm ittee. MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Min ister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I wish to table before the House the year-end Financial Statement for Venture Manitoba Tours Limited for the year 1985-86.

Just a word of explanation, Madam Speaker. In previous years this report has been part of the Consolida ted Statements of Boards and Commissions and Government Agencies. It is this year being tabled as a separate item and in that my departmental Estimates are now before review, I thought it would be tabled. It's not part of my department, but it does report to me, so perhaps as the final item on my department's Estimates they would want to have that information. MADAM SPEAKER: No tices of Motion ... Introduction of Bills . .

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have five visitors who are rotary exchange students under the direction of Mr. Fraser Stuart. The visitors are from the constituency of the Honourable Min ister of Municipal Affairs; and we have 27 students of Grade 9 from the Murdoch MacKay Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Schroeder. The school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTIONS Constitutional Agreement - hearings throughout province MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

My question to the Premier is, given that there is an intention after the discussions that will further take place and lead to a formal legal document with respect to future constitutional change to bring Quebec into the Constitution, that will involve the passage of a motion in this Legislature in support of that formal resolution; I wonder if the Premier could confirm and indeed assure the people of Manitoba that the public hearing process that will be necessary and will be carried out to hear the views of the people of Mani toba on that constitutional agreement, that that public hearing process will involve meetings being held throughout the provin ce, not just in Winnipeg.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, certainly the desire is to ensure public input. The details of public input, I think, are a matter that should be left to discussion between our respective House Leaders and ensure that we work out a satisfactory means of ensuring the public input that we desire. Workers Compensation Board - Report of King Commission MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, I have a further question. This is to the Minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board.

I wonder if he can ind icate whether or not his office has yet received the report of the King Commission, 1567

Monday, 4 May, 1987 the Legislative Review Commission into the Workers Compensation Board. MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho no ur able Min ister responsible for Workers Compensation. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, we have not received a complete report of the King Committee. We expect that we should be receiving a complete report by the end of the week. MR. G. FILMON: I wonder, Madam Speaker, if the Min ister can ind icate whether or not he will table that report as soon as it is received by his office. HON. H.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, we have had questions on this report previous ly, and I ind icated at that time that I would be tabling the report when we have had an opportunity to print it, and to look at the recommendations that are put forward by the King Review Comm ittee. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, by that answer I wonder if the Min ister is ind icating that it will not be printed when he receives it in its final form. HON. H.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, the review committee has been working on this for about a year and-a-half now, and it has taken them a longer period of time to bring the final report than they had expected. The report is not in one piece at this time, and it is just coming to the stage where it will be going to the printers. MR. G. FILMON: I wonder if the Minister could ind icate, Madam Speaker, how long he believes it will be before he can table the complete report in the Legislature. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, we will be tabling it as soon as it is possible.

Once the printing is completed we'll be tabling it as soon as possible. MR. G. FILMON: Yes, Madam Speaker, does the Min ister have an estimate of time that that might take? HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, it'll be going to the prin ters and it's difficult to say how long it would take to print it I would not want to guess how long it would take for the printers to print the final report. Long-term Disabilities Report, by Craig Cormack - receipt of MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, has the Minis ter's office received the report of the Long-Term Disabilities Committee prepared by Mr. Craig Cormack? HON. H.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, we have said on previous occasions that it is an internal report that has been received by the Board of Commis sioners, and it is not a final report. We have been told the committee is still working on the report which is meant for the Workers Compensation Board. MR. G. FILMON: Given that when I asked the question on this particular investigation and report some time ago, the Min ister ind icated, and I quote: "If the Leader of the Opposition would like to come, we would like to share any information that we have.

If he wants to come and see some of the information we've got I welcome him." Would that report be one of the pieces of information and reviews that I could see, should I come to his office or to the Workers Compensation Board offices? HON. H. HARAP IAK: No, Madam Sp eak er, that committee's report is an internal document, and it is meant for the Workers Compensation Board, and it is not meant for the member. Long-term Disabilities Report - critical of wee MR. G.

FILMON: Is the reason why he's not willing to share that report, the fact that it is very critical of the administration of the Workers Compensation Board, and indeed, places a great deal of criticism on their current affairs in the administration of the long-term disabili ties? HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition will remember all the criticism there was directed in the direction of Workers Compensation when he was part of the government. We are still going through a lot of reform on the Workers Compe nsation.

The re has been a lot of reform conducted because there was a lot of changes needed, because there were services not being received by members of the community who were injur ed and hurt on the job site. They have made a lot of changes in the area of rehabilitation, but we had said all along that there is still ongoing reform that is needed, there is ongoing reform that is being carried out, and there will be criticism. It's an impo ssibility to deal with all claimants in a positive way so naturally there will be some criticism directed at Workers' Compensation.

That has never been any different, it is still going on at this time. Tax measures and tax increases - which came into effect today MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I direct my question to the Min ister of Finance. Can he ind icate what new tax measures and tax increases came into effect today? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minis ter of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Those that were announced in the Budget, Madam Speaker. MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, I ask the Min ister of Finance if he could repeat them for the House and for the people of Manitoba; what products are coming under taxation? 1568

Monday, 4 May, 1987 HON. E. KO STYRA: I had thought that the purpose of question period was to seek information that the member does not have. The member is well aware of what measures, from the Budget, took effect today. If he would like further detail I will provide it with a further copy of the Budget Address if he does not recall what was in that budget. I know that he didn't take much interest in it at the time, and now he is trying to generate some in terest. MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, the Mini ster has just provided clear evidence that there were so many tax measures announc ed on Budget night that he can't remember them all. Removal of retail tax exemption on insulation - rationale for MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker, my question to the Mini ster of Finance. Why has the government decided to remove the retail tax exemption? It used to apply to insulation materials and energy saving devices. What is the rationale for the removal of that exemption? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: I would have thought the best time for discussion and debate on matters related to the Budget would have been in the extensive amount of time that was available for discussion and debate on the budget. That's the normal practice, there's a normal period of time set aside for that debate in which all members, and indeed that member participated. The reason for any of the tax increases related to the need to provide sufficient funds for the government to provide for services, such as, health, education, social services and, at the same time, bring about some reduction in the deficit.

I'm pleased to have been able to do that in a way that has provided funds for those services and brought down a reduction in the deficit, unlike governments of the same political stripe as the member opposite in Saskatchewan and Alberta who have done the opposite, Madam Speaker. MR. C. MANNESS: A final supplementary, Madam Speaker. Will the government now be increasing loan limits, or reducing interests rates, under the various provisions of the CHEC loan program to offset a 7 percent increase in all insulation materials, such as, weatherstriping, caulking materials, triple-glazed windo ws, triple-glazed doors?

Will the government be increasing some of the grants under that program, to offset the increase in sales tax? HON. E. KOS TYRA: I'll allow that question to be answered in full by the Min ister of Energy and Mines, but I can say that the government is pleased to continue support through programs like that to ensure that people have the oppor tuni ties to provi de for con servation materials in their homes and, at the same time, continue job creation in the Province of Manitoba. Sugar beet industry - tripartite agreement MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. H.

PANK RATZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Premier of the province. Will there be, in the Province of Manitoba, a sugar beet agreement? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWL EY: Madam Speaker, the Min ister of Agriculture will deal with that question in detail, if required. Needless to say, Madam Speaker, there have been contin ued discussions in volvi ng the Federal Go vern ment representatives and the Min ister of Agriculture, and myself, in an effort to ensure that the very real concerns that we, as a Provincial Government, have are addressed and are dealt with.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourabl e Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, further to that question, I wish to ind icate to my honourable friend that, based on our discussions of last week with the Hon. Jake Epp, two proposals were discussed, and a third option was provided to us by Mr. Epp. Any of those three proposals were agreeable to us and as a result of further discussions and Mr. Epp going back to his col leagues, we were unable to finali ze an agreement.

There were further discussions over the weekend and today, Madam Speaker, the concerns still remain the same, and that is, of course, the question of the deficit and our participation in that deficit. It's been agreed that the Federal Government take back our discussions and will be getting back to us on what flexibil ity, if any, they have in this whole area. Premier's statement re CF-18 in Free Press MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Premier.

Madam Speak er, in Saturday's Free Press, the Premier made the astounding statement that one should let bygones be bygones, and that he has forgiven the Prime Mini ster for past offences, including the CF-18 decision. Madam Speaker, the Premier is the only citizen of the pro vince that ha s forgiven the Federal Government for that decision . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: . . . and, therefore, I would ask him to renounce that statement in the Ho use today. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Let me assure the Member for River Heights that at no time did I ind icate that Manitobans, nor the Premier, forgave the Federal Government for 1569

Monday, 4 May, 1987 the decision on the CF -1 8. I'm not the writer of headlines, Madam Speaker, and I regret very much that ... Let me assure you that when the Federal Government un dertakes initiatives that are wrong we will call them wrong. We will not hesitate to say so, as we did with the CF-18. Madam Speaker, when the Prime Min ister deserves to be commended, when the Federal Government deserves to be commended, we will also commend, unlike honourable members across the way that appear to have a single-focused attitude toward all matters, in a very partisan way. Question period policy -

preambles placing blame MRS. S. CARST AIRS: Madam Speaker , with a supplementary to the First Min ister. Putting aside the evangelical fervour of forgiveness on his part, can the Premier confirm that it will be a new policy in question period of this House that . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honour able First Min ister on a point of order . HON. H. PAWL EY: If the honourable member would have listened to my comments, I would have indic ated that the word "forgiveness" was attributable to the headline writer in the Free Press, and not to myself. MADAM SPEAKER: A dispute over the facts is not a point of order.

The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker, to continue with my question: Will it now be a policy of this government, in question period, that we will no longer have Cabinet Min isters giving

preambles to their questions that place all blame for whatever happens in this province on the Federal Government, but will ins tead ans wer qu estions which will make them responsible for the affairs of Manitoba? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, when the party to which the honourable member belongs was in power, we called the shots when they did the wrong thing, whether it was the Crow rate, tobacco; whether it was the deregulation policies of the Member for Winnipeg South Centre; whether it was in respect to equalization, the lack of tax reform.

Madam Speaker, we don't have any intention on our part of desisting from calling the shots and being prepared to condemn governments, Federal Governments, whether it be the Liberal stripe or the Cons ervative stripe when wrong is done. At the same time, Madam Speaker, I'm not going to hesitate to give credit where credit is due when good things are done on the part of the Federal Government. Senate appointments of Spivak, Roblin and Nurgitz MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A final question to the Premier, Madam Speaker.

In his statement today to the Legislature there's a rather cheap shot, I think, made at Senate appointments in this province. Would the First Mini ster like to define which one of Senators Spivak, Roblin and Nurgitz, who are our recent appointments, he considers first rate and which ones he considers to be less than that? HON. H. PAWLEY: If the honourable member wishes me to do so I will go across the country and deal with all 108 Senate appointments and advise her which ones I believe were simply pasturing old Liberal politicians off to the Senate because the Liberal Party didn't know what to do with them.

Urgent economic topics - ongoing MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. C. BAKER: My question is to the First Min ister. In his winding up of the statement he made on his trip to Ottawa, he mentioned now we should get on with the job of dealing with the urgent economic social policy issues facing our country, and he mentions agriculture, western div ersification, tax reform and day care. I was wondering if he could tell us when these topics will keep on going, especially as in regard to agriculture. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, an annou ncement will be made very shortly, I believe, by the Prime Minis ter's office of a visit to the Province of Manitoba, and certainly I intend to ensure that at the top of my agenda, and I'm sure it would be on the top of the Prime Min ister's agenda, would be discussion on the question of agriculture, in general in Canada, particularly in the Province of Manitoba in the west, and what can be done in order to more successfully contend with what is a grave crisis in family agriculture brought about because of trade problems gravely affecting the sale of produce.

Provincially-owned school buses - analysis of costs MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin-R ussell. MR. L. DERKACH: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Min ister of Education. For some time, or for several years, the former Mini ster, and this Minister more recently, have indicated to school divisions the cost-effectiveness of using provinciall y-owned school buses.

Last year during the Estimates process, Madam Speaker , I asked the Min ister of Education whether he would provide us with the analysis of costs of provincially-owned school buses, including such costs as maintenance costs, garage costs and capital costs of the buses. To date I have not received that information, Madam Speaker, and I'm wondering whether the Minister would like to provide this in formation before we go in to the Estimates process. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourabl e Mi nister of Education. 1570

Monday, 4 May, 1987 HON. J. STORIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm certainly prep ared to look at whatever undertakings were made that weren't complied with in terms of the Estimates debates that went on last year. I'm not aware of any continuing obligation. I understood the memb er to ask several qu estions that were responded to in one way or another; some questions were in fact held over and responses developed for the member during the Estimates process, but if there's some further information that he feels that he would need before the Estimates review, I'm perfectly willing to provide what information I can.

Provincially-owned school buses - analysis of costs - tabling of info. MR. L. DERKACH: Madam Speaker, if the Minis ter would care to check Hansard, he would see that he did commit himself to making that information available, and to date that information has not been made available. I'm wondering whether he is prepared to table that. HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker, given his obvious enthusiasm for that information, I'm somewhat surprised he didn't bring this to my attention.a little bit earlier that he hadn't received information that he felt was for thcoming.

I'm no t aware of any thing that the department or the Pupil Transportation Division has available for tabling at this point for the member's information, but I've ind icated that if he will give me some specifics on what he feels he needs to know, I'm perfectly prepared to provide whatever information the branch has available for him. St. Vital Mustangs, Community Places Program Grant - request declined MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. J. WALDING: Madam Speaker, my question is to the Min ister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation and it concerns the St.

Vital Mustangs, a long-established club in St. Vital, well regarded by the people of St. Vital. The club has been provincial champions on numerous occasions and national champions on several occasions. Recently they raised a sum of money and applied to the Min ister for a matching grant under the Community Places Program. My question is, to what extent was the Mi nister perso nally in volved in declining that request? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Mini ster of Culture and Heritage Resources. HON. J. WAS YLYCIA-LEIS: Thank you , Ma dam Speaker.

As has been brought to the attention of all members of this House, decisions for the Community Places Program are by a committee of Cabinet, following research and data collected by staff. I think it should be pointed out to all members of the Ho use that there 1571 were over 500 applications, and the demand and the need was certainly far greater than anyone had ever anticipated, ind icating the very important nature of this program. We will certainly be encouraging all projects, who were not successful this time, if they are eligible, to apply again. MR. J. WALDING: A supplementary question, Madam Speaker.

In view of the fact that the application inv olves a possible fire hazard for changing rooms in a basement location, would the Min ister be prepared to review the application? HON. J. WASYL YCIA-LE IS: Madam Speaker , I'll certainly look at the information again, but I should repeat that the decision-mak ing is by a Cabin et committee and all decisions are confirmed through Cabinet. Again, there were many, many needs and a great demand for assistance to improve facilities and to meet a variety of pressing community needs.

I regret that we were not able to meet all of that, but we are committed to, over the next several years, with over $30 million injected into this program, begin to meet some of those pressing concerns of Manitoba. Morley Kenneth Daniels - appeal of sentence by A/G MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: My question is to the Attorney General. It concerns the sentencing of Morley Kenneth Daniels, who tortured and brutally sexually assaulted a woman in front of her children.

Crown Attorney Rampersad is reported to have said, society must be protected and that this is one of the worst sexual assault cases. He called Daniels' actions those of a perverted, dangerous man and called for a life sentence. Will the Attorney-General appeal the sentence of nine years, and show that this government means business about protecting the women against violence? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R.

PENNER: This government certainly does mean business in protecting women against violence; this government has led the country with respect to its policy concerning battered wives, not only in terms of the prosecutorial policy but with respect to the services that we have supplied. Let there be no doubt about that. The member, in asking the question, quotes from our Crown prosecutor. The Crown prosecutor asked for a life sentence. Clearly the Crown prosecutor on the line was doing his duty in line with that policy.

The fact that the judge did not go along with the recommendation of the Crown prosecutor is a matter that we will certainly consider. All such matters are referred to a special committee that we have of senior officials in the department, who regularly review cases of that kind, and make a decision as to whether or not an appeal will follow. I will wait for the recommendation. MRS. G. HAMMOND: I hope that the Attorney-General will give this particular case the highest prior ity.

Monday, 4 May, 1987 People in Equal Participation Incorporated - request for wheelchair services for members of PEP MRS. G. HAMMOND: I have a new question to the First Minis ter, Madam Speaker. The People in Equal Participation Incorpor ated are holding a special event on May 12, Manitoba Day at the Legislature. They have written the Premier for 10 PEP members who are wheelchair-bound - they need some help so that they may also view the House while it's in Session. I wonder what accommodations the First Minis ter has arranged for wheelchair access for the members of PEP.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Min ister of Government Services. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, we have been in contact with the commun ity, and we're trying to facilitate them by having them view question period in the Speaker's Chambers. We have made this proposal to them. If they accept it, that's the way they will be viewing question period that day. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: Madam Speaker, I ask the First Min ister then, in light of the arrangements, but they can watch it on TV at any time, I'm wondering if the First Min ister could arrange that on that particular day, we would have the 10 wheelchair-bound people in this Chamber? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minis ter. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I gather this matter was dealt with at the LMC Meeting in volving representatives of the different parties. I was not in attendance at that meeting, but it's my understanding this has already been dealt with at the Legislative Management Comm ittee meeting.

I would certainly personally want to ascertain the recommendations of the members of that committee. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Madam Speaker, I am now going over the head of that committee, and going directly to the Premier, to ask on behalf of these wheelchair residents of Manitoba, that they be allowed to come and view the Legislature on that particular day which is Manitoba Day. And I ask the First Min ister to give special consideration. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, certainly because of the seriousness of the question and our desire, as all the members of this Legislature, to ensure equal access, I will certainly take the matter under advisement and ascertain what the recommendations are from LMC, from Government Services, and ascertain whether there's some other route that can be proceeded with, in order to ensure - if all members would desire - equal access to all residents of Manitoba, to all public buildings, including this Chamber to watch the proceedings.

So, Madam Speaker, I will give the Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park my word that I will personally look into it. AIDS - bisexual activity MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River East. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Min ister of Health.

Given the fact that a medical doctor from Min nesota, at a recent Winnip eg Conf erence, has pointed out that the heterosexual community is now experiencing an increased risk of AIDS, due to the activity of bisexual males; and given the fact that here in Manitoba we have recently identified male bisexuals with AIDS; can the Min ister advise the House what is being done to inform the community at large regarding the danger of AIDS being spread through bisexual activity? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Min ister of Health. HON. L.

DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker , the honourable member was present when we had quite a discussion during my Estimates, and I suggest that she read Hansard if she wants to be reminded of what was said. This is not something that you can answer just during a period such as this, it is complicated and we spent hours and hours discussing that at the time. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Madam Speaker, I was wanting to know what this government is doing specifically as a result of very recent information.

My second question to the Minister, Madam Speaker, is: Has the Village Clinic provided this Mini ster with how many of the 100 Manitobans infected with the AIDS virus are No. 1, homosexual; No. 2, bisexual; No. 3, female; No. 4, children? HON. L. DESJARDINS: I doubt if that information, Madam Speaker, would be available. I'll find out. Part of it could be available - I would imagine. I'll find out and I'll report to the House if there's any information that could be transmitted to the committee. MRS. B.

MITCHELSON: Madam Speaker, my final supplementary to the Min ister is: How many of the 100 Manitobans infected with the AIDS virus have given names to trace contacts? And as a result of this contact tracing, how many further cases of infection have been diagnosed? What I'm asking is, how many cases of AIDS have been diagnosed as a result of contact tracing? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Sp eaker, my honourable friend kno ws this is not available.

The contacts, the time, are researched or are discussed with the doctors, not necessarily just the one person, a lot of that is left to the doctor who discusses this with the patient and follows through. Gowler, Mitch - inquest into death MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Community Services and Corrections. 1572

Monday, 4 May, 1987 My question to the Min ister is regarding the episode of the drowning of Mitch Gowl er, while he was looking after a mentally hand icapped pers on. The drug prescription for this mentally handicapped person had been increased just days before the tragedy to control his violent nature. Why was this mentally handicapped person allowed to leave with only one person to cope with him on a one-to-one basis when it was known that the handicapped person had a real problem? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Minis ter of Community Services. HON. M.

SMITH: Madam Speaker, I don't know the answer to that specific question. I do know that the mentally handicapped individual was of small stature, roughly 120 pounds, and that the man looking after him was an experienced worker well over six foot and a sizable individual. Again, the particular circumstances of the tragedy are not known, other than by inf erence, with regard to the general use of drugs and whether they have a direct impact on the behaviour of an individual.

As the member knows, we have asked the College of Physicians and Surgeons to take that particular issue unde r their cons ideration and to make recommendations to us. If, Madam Speaker, we find that there is not a clear policy recommendation coming from them, we will undertake a more thorough study and consideration of that matter, but I don't agree with the reasoning that the member opposite gives in this particular case. MR. A. BROWN: My question is to the same Mini ster. Will the Mini ster ask for an inqu est into the death of Mitch Gowler so that we may have an independent inqu iry looking after this matter?

HON. M. SMITH: Madam Speaker, there is a process that's followed whenever there is a death that is not readily explainable. I think in this case the police and the chief medical examiner have been involved, and I think they are the appropriate people to make that determination. Gowler, Mitch - compensation to family MR. A. BROWN: Mi tch Go wler was rec eiving remuneration for looking after this handicapped person and other handicapped persons. Will there be any compensation going to his family? In other words, was there any type of insurance coverage? HON. M. SMITH: I'll take that under advisement.

Community Services - Annual Report MR. A. BROWN: I have another question for the Minis ter. In about one weeks time, we are going to be on the Estimates of Community Services. To date we have not received the annual report. When may we expect this annual report? HON. M. SMITH: Madam Speaker, the Annual Report for Community Services, comparable to the period of time being covered by the other reports tabled, wasn't tabled last year. Crop seeding - lack of operating credit MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Virden. MR. G. FIND LAY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Agriculture.

Madam Speaker, there are fairly large areas in the Province of Manitoba where very little seeding has commenced to this point in time. I'd like to ask the Minister of Agriculture if he has determined how many farmers in the Province of Manitoba are having difficulty in getting their crops seeded because of lack of operating credit? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourabl e Mi nis ter of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, I will take that specific qu estion as notice and see whether or not there are some statistics that we may have insofar as the availabili ty or non-av ailabili ty of opera ting credit.

Madam Speaker, the question of operating credit has been one that's been debated in this country and in this province for over five years. In fact, the Province of Manitoba has provided a provincial operating loan guarantee program over the last number of years in excess of $100 million. However, we realize that we are not able to meet all the credit needs of Manitoba farmers, but I want to take that question as notice to see whether there are large tracts of land going unseeded and what some of the reasons might be. Operating Loan Guarantee Program - criteria for limiting usefulness MR. G.

FINDLAY: Given that the Guaranteed Operating Loan that the Min ister mentioned, only $53 million of the available $100 million has been utilized by farmers and it seems to be some of the criteria that are in volved in the program is limiting its usefulness, will the Minister look at changing that criteria, Madam Speaker, to make it more available to farmers immediately? HON. B. URUSKI: In terms of the Operating Loan Guarantee Program, although the current outlay of capital is $53 million, it has grown, Madam Speaker, from a low of $25 million in the first year and continues to be there.

The use of the program, of course, is made by private lending institutions, and we've attempted to, and are still attempting to, enc ourage all the institutions to participate in it, but clearly those applications that are coming in through the program would be handled in a normal fashion. I realize that the $1 25,000 limit under the program might not be enough to meet all farmers' needs, and that's why all 10 provincial Min isters of Agriculture, two years ago, attempted to get the Federal Government to complement provincial programs of the Operating Loan Guarantee Program.

All 10 Min isters of Agriculture suggested that to the Federal Government. It has not been accepted to date, Madam Speaker. MR. G. FIND LAY: In addition to that criteria, would he also look at the criteria of the 12 .5 percent 1573

Monday, 4 May, 1987 government guarantee, and consider increasing that amount of guarantee on those loans? HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, it should be pointed out that the 12.5 percent guarantee is a very generous guarantee in terms of the program, because what it does is allow for the entire loan portfolio - for example, if an institution has $10 million of loan guarantees under the program and there is, let's say, a loss of $1 million in that program, the program pays 100 percent of the loss to a total of 12 .5 percent of the aggregate loans on the program.

Madam Speaker, it is a very generous program, and in fact has been utilized every year in a greater and greater amount than any other program that has been in place. Admittedly, it will not meet all the credit needs of all farmers, but certainly it has gone a long way in this area. Supreme Court - three judges from Quebec MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. A question to the Premier.

Could the Premier advise the House whether, at the meeting of the First Min isters on the Constitution, the First Ministers agreed that three judges on the Supreme Court would come from the Province of Quebec and that Quebec would have a veto with respect to any future changes in that constitutional provisi on? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker,

section 42 of the Canada Act requires now unanimous consent of all provinces. Under 41 includes the House of Commons, the Senate, the composition of the Supreme Court. (lnterjection)- I'm going to allow the Attorney-General, who is much more an authority on constitutional law, to respond to that legal question. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney General. HON. R. PENNER: I'm sorry, Madam Speaker, the Premier and I were talking about two different sections of the Constitution. The Constitution prese ntly has the unani mous provision in

section 41. The Premier was quite right, of course, in saying the intent of the agreement is that those institutions now referred to in

section 42, which includes the Supreme Court of Canada with respect to changes after the amendment that is being proposed as being enacted would require unanim ity. With respect to the appointments from Quebec, it has been a constitutional convention that three judges who are learned in the civil law be appointed to the Supreme Court. How the new provision will be worded when the Supreme Court, which is not presently part of the Constitution, is at last imb edded in the Constitution and protected by the unani mity rule, how that will be phrased is not yet clear.

Whether it will be a question of three judges from Quebec or three judges learned in the civil law, that's a matter yet to be ascertained. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, a further supplementary question to the First Min ister.

Given certainly the need for appointments to the Supreme Court who are learned in the civil law, but given the fact that Quebec presently has a population that represents some 26 percent of the total Canadian population, should that percentage of the total Canadian population drop significantly, say below 20 percent, what flexibility would there be in the constitutional provisions that the First Min ister has agreed to that would avoid a veto by the Province of Quebec over any change that would then require the appointment of three judges from Quebec,

whereas that province might only have, at that time, somewhat less than 20 percent of the Canadian popu lation? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I think that we can get into a lot of different hypothetical possibili ties that could occur , ins ofar as the Constitution is concerned and change in population. But, Madam Speaker, there is nothing in the Constitution that restricts the number of Supreme Court judges to nine. It's my understanding that more than nine could be appointed in the future, if it was deemed to be reasonable, gi ven change s in the futur e such as population shift or increase or variation.

MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY COMMITTEE CHANGE MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Elmwood, that the composition of the Standing Committee on Economic Development be amended as follows: The Hon. V. Schroeder for D. Scott; C. Baker for S. Ashton. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J.

COWAN: I move, seconded by the Min ister of Agriculture, that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION presented and carried and the Ho use resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Sup ply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Natural Resources; and the Honourable Memb er for Lac du Bonnet in the Chair for the Department of Hig hways and Transportation. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPO RTATION MR.

CHAIRMAN, C. Baker: Committee, come to order. We're on page 96 and I think we had gone through (c) 1574

Monday, 4 May, 1987 and we're now working on (d), but we agreed that we would go back if we wanted to, okay? The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to just make a brief comment this afternoon. The Minister put before us, on Thursda y, his Yellowhead Route propo sed program, projects to be considered, and I didn't react on Thu rsday, because I had not taken the time to study it as well as I wanted to.

But I want to put it on the record that I appreciate the Minister taking the time to consult with the members whose ridings contain High way 16 , and listening to the input of those members. I think that we have to be appreciative of the fact that $20 million will be spent in the province on the Yellowhead route. Those of us who have lived on the Yellowhead and who see it historically as running from Portage la Prairie to the Saskatchewan border, I suppose, felt that we had first call on all of the money from that

section westward, but I believe there has been an honest attempt at making the entire highway system, including the

section where we have dual laning, into a situation where we use the money to the best advantage. I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing on the specific proposed locations, except to say that this will make the Yellowhead route a much-imp roved highway. I want the record to clearly show that we appreciate the Minister consulting with the members to the western side of the province. Turning to Bridges and Structures, unfortunately I had to leave the room for a min ute during Estimates and I haven't seen the copy. Did the Minis ter outline what the specific projects of this department are this year? MR.

CHAIRMAN: Bridges and Structures, Salaries - we had not yet started on that section. The Honourable Mini ster. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, we had. MR. CHAIRMAN: We had it started? Oh, I didn't believe we had discussed anything on it, sorry. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we had dealt with the Selkirk Bridge and some discussion there with the Member for Lakeside. I was just going to get to the various bridges that are going to be done under a couple of programs that are related to this section. Mr. Chairman, we have two major appropriations that deal with bridges.

One is the Construction Program where major work is programmed and then we have another allocation of some $700,000 for miscellaneous repairs and upgrading of bridges throughout the province and replacements and then, of course, there's general maintenance which is small repairs, painting and minor deck repairs and so on.

So in the construction budget this year dealing with bridges, we have a couple of major ones: the Roseau River Bridge on High way 59 will be done this year; as well as some acquisition projects for approaches on Hi ghway 21 at the Assiniboine River, that are load limited at 33 tonnes; then we have a major project for the approaches at West Bakers Narrows in the North, on High way 10, at Flin Flon; then a couple of bridges on 44, on the twinning project that is taking place there. Those are the major brid ges in the Construction Program.

Then in the Miscellaneous Bridge Program, which is some $700,000 - those were mostly, I should say, Mr. Chairman, first on PTH's, those bridges that I just mentioned. We have bridges on PR's throughout the province in this program and it's quite a lengthy list with estimates that range from in the neighbourhood of $30,000 to $50,000.00. I could go through all of those bridges in various districts in the province right through from Dis trict 1 to District 11 involving replacement bridges. These are all replacement bridges. There are two on 306; one on 217 in the R.M. of Franklin.

The first two on 306 were in the R.M. of Springfield. There is one on 218 in the R.M. of Fra nklin; one in the R.M. of Thompson on 338, Tobacco Creek; there's one on 305, Access 305, the R.M. of Dufferin; 344 in the R.M. of Oakland, there are a couple; 227, three bridges there in the R.M. of Portage la Prairie. There's one on 254 in the R.M. of Rossburn; one on 466 in the R.M. of Rosedale; one on 58 1 in the R.M. of Ste. Rose. There's access - in the neigh bourhood of 267, the R.M. of Gil bert Plains, there's two bridges; 581 in the R.M. of Ste.

Rose, a watershed drain has a new bridge; another one on the watershed drain, access 58 1, the R.M. of Ste. Rose; on PR 480, the Laurier Drain in Ochre River; and access to 275, the South Ditch in Swan River, R.M.; PR 488 in Swan River as well; and 275 in the R.M. of Swan River; and 516 in the R.M. of Bifrost. Those are the bridges that will be replaced or rebuilt - new bridges; so there's about 23 bridges in the miscellaneous bridge program in addition to the four or five major bridge projects in the construction program that are being undertaken.-(I nterjection)- MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr.

Blake - the Memb er for Min nedosa had his hand up. MR. D. BLAKE: The west bridge in Bakers Narrows, what is proposed there? Are they going to remove that steel structure and put in another causeway, similar to the one on the East Narrows, or are they going to leave that structure in place? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, Mr. Chairman, we will be putting in a new bridge right next to the existing structure and remove it after the other one is in place. The approaches will be done this year and then the structure next year, that's the intent - or pre-advertise it in the fall or something. MR. D.

BLAKE: Will the new structure be going on the north side of the existing bridge or the south? HON. J. PLOHMAN: On the south side. MR. D. BLAKE: Good, you won't ruin the rock for casting off then, off the north side. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, they're looking very carefully at the areas for casting as well as the burial grounds in the area, the two major considerations. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, the Minister might want to refer this question to Engineering, but when 1575

Monday, 4 May, 1987 does the department decide to build a structure rather than using a large culvert? It seems to me that there's a considerable cost saving, the use of large diameter culverts and the long-term maintenance shouldn't be as high, and I give you a specific example of why I asked the question, Mr. Minis ter. Just south of Riding Mountain on High way 5, the structure that was put in there last year, I don't know what the price precisely was - one never wants to believe scuttlebutt - but considering the work that was done there, I know it would be considerable.

That same creek is handled by culverts of a modest diameter, both above and below that crossing and I would wonder why the department insists on going to these more expensive structures when culverts, I'm told by people in volved in the ind ustry, would very often serve the same purpose and would have a lower maintenance cost in the long run? At what point does the department make that decision in terms of size? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the question has many ramifications.

I wasn't certain whether the member was asking about when you'd go from a box culvert to say a bridge or when you would use a corrugated culvert versus a box culvert. I'm informed that the corrugated culverts are used mostly on PR's but the box culverts, the concrete box culverts are used where possible, where the hydraulic requirements don't dictate that a bridge be put in. The concrete box culverts would be put in because of their additional load-bearing capacity that they would have over a corrugated pipe.

And they also would last longer and wouldn't be as susceptible to damage and deterioration and therefore wouldn't have to be repaired as frequently. So the box culverts would be used mostly on PTH's and the corrugated pipes on PR's except where bridges are required because of the hydraulic requirements for peak flows that are dictated and provided to us by Water Resources and there may be other concerns such as fishery concerns, where a culvert might impede the spawning activities of fish and so on that require a more elaborate structure. Those are all the things considered.

General ly, the department would try to put in the least cost alternative. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I gu ess wha t I'm trying to determine is, when you talk about peak flows, where does the department get that information from? Is it from its own engineers or did you just say from Natural Resources? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we do have some capacity or capability within the depa rtment to determine requirements, but basically we rely on Water Resources to provide us with information as to the capacities that are required on the basis of their studies in the field on flooding frequencies and so on.

For PTH's it's generally a 1-in-50 year flood capacity is provided for; on PR's it's 1-in-33 years. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask some questions in the area of traffic inspections. The Member for Turtle Mountain had some questions.-(lnterjection) Okay. First of all, does this include all inspection stations; at least the traffic inspections stations, I presume, fall in this area? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, Mr. Chairman, that's right. There are 11 permanent highw ay traffic inspection stations, two of which are staffed on a 24-hour basis at Headingley and West Hawk Lake.

There are 26 staff allocated to the 11 permanent inspection stations. There are 15 inspection territories with 18 inspection staff assigned to patrol those 15 territories with portable scales that are set up on short notice so that there's a random check in addition to the permanent stations that are in place. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: With the movement towards deregulation of the trucking industry - and I think there's little doubt that Manitoba is moving in that direction according to the discussions that I've had with truckers - they believe that over 90 percent, and I would ask the Minister if he could confirm this, that over 90 percent of the applications for rights to haul are approved now.

If that is the case, does Traffic In spections have enough staff to deal with what would be the offsetting means of regulating the trucking industry with increased emphasis on safety rather than on areas where income and right to haul was more restricted? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify on the statement from the Member for Ste.

Rose regarding approval of requests for authorities, the request for authorities to haul designated commodities, the list of which has been greatly expanded in the last couple of years, is probably, as the member says, 90 percent approval based on ability to provide the service. The general PSV authorities for carriers in rural Manitoba would be, I believe, far less than that.

They still hold a similar kind of hearing that has always been held with regard to the application, approving the public need and convenience, although there is an effort to share the onus of the responsibility to prove the public need will be enhanced versus the intervenor proving that it will be to the detriment of the public need to have a particular authority approved. So there is a little bit of sharing of responsibili ty there. That's the only way the hearing process has really changed insofar as the authorities being requested.

But insofar as the designated commodities, it's true that there have been a lot of applications coming from persons who were previously not operators of trucking services in the province, and a dramatic increase. Therefore, there is a need to provide, I think, greater enforcement. I don't believe that we're fully meeting the need at this time both from the point of view of weights and equipment and so on, but we're moving in that direction.

We have just introduced the new CVI, Commercial Vehicle Inspection Program, which is for trucks of a certain weight and does not distinguish between what kind of trucking authority they may have. It applies to all of them insofar as inspections are concerned, with truck trailers having to be insp ected, I believe, once a year and truck tractors twice a year. So there is that side of it. Insofar as the weights are concerned, inspections there, we're going to have to do more and we will be doing more through the national safety code as we implement it as agreed to by all provinces.

Fortunately, although the details haven't been final ized yet in 1576

Monday, 4 May, 1987 Manitoba at Treasury Board, there has been significant federal funding offered for the first five years of the implementation of the national safety code and that will mean additional staff once that is approved for inspection function. A lot of this will be paid for, as I say, for the first five years from federal dollars, because this in itiative regarding deregulation was basically a federal initiative.

Although it's primarily dealing with interprovincial trucking, as the member mentioned, there have been a lot of additional people entering into trucking service here in the province for intraprovincial as well, because of the expanded designa ted commodity list. Therefore, we're going to be assisted in meeting the need there for greater enforcement as well. So it's going to be an evolving process, I think, in terms of meeting the need. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: Could the Min ister tell us how many people are working at West Hawk Lake?

You mentioned there were 11 full time working on these two 24-hour stations? HON. J. PLOHMAN: No. Mr. Chairman, I said there were 26 staff at the 11 permanent faqilities. West Hawk Lake would have eight staff. MR. D. ROCAN: And Headingley would have another six, I would imagine? HON. J. PLO HMAN: Six at Head in gley? Eight at Heading ley. MR. D. ROCAN: That's with two temporary? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure whether they're temporary staff there involved or not. Gr eg Catteeuw, who is here, would maybe have some information. Mr.

Chairman, I'm just advised that two of the people at Head ingl ey are on term because two of the permanent staff are on long-term disability, and you can only fill those positions with term positions as long as those people are on disability, for one year. MR. D. ROCAN: Under inspections, I wonder if the Mini ster could inform us if this working alone plan with the traffic inspections, has it been implemented and is it working yet. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I missed - what is that? MR. CHAIRMAN: Repeat your question, please. MR. D.

ROCAN: The working alone plan that you have with your in spectors at the scales, has it been implemented yet and is it working? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I am advised that the working alone plan has been distributed to all of the staff, and they have discussed it and are beginning to utilize that plan at the present time. The member is obviously familiar with some of the people who are involved in it, and has probably some more specific information on it that he would like to bring forward. MR. D.

ROCAN: No, you know, on your working alone plan for the traffic inspectors, and I just happen to note, one of the ways it's going to be implemented is all area inspection staff are in radio communic ation with other radio operators. We're talking radio operators, we're talking West Hawk Lake tied in with Heading ley or with Souris and Brandon? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, I'm advised it's not so much with each inspection station right across the province, but with the district headquarters in each of those areas. They are all radio equipped. MR. D. ROCAN: Mr.

Chairman, West Hawk Lake and Hea dingley, that's quite a distance and that can be radio equipped back and forth, or is it through the telephone, that one? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised that they would be connected by telephone. MR. D. ROCAN: And yet, Mr. Chairman, the idea of this working alone plan, is this to protect the employees from getting mugged, or any idea? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The people who are working at Heading ley and West Hawk Lake are obviously working in pairs at night, and in the mobile areas as well in the evening, but wherever there are additional hours.

The 24-hour stations are Headingley and West Hawk Lake, and so there are two staff on them during the evening. During the daytime, if there's one staff, of course, they are radio equipped. MR. D. ROCAN: I also notice that your working alone plan, some of the details are that some of the required equipment is emergency first aid. Are our inspectors now taking the St. John's Ambulance course, or are they prepared to give first aid? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Are the inspectors prepared, equi pped and trained to give First Aid? Is that the question? MR. D. ROCAN: Yes. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm advised, Mr.

Chairman, that Workpla ce Health and Safety felt that it wasn't necessary to have them equipped with the St. John's Ambulance training courses or other first aid courses, but they do have first aid kits with them. MR. D. ROCAN: On this working alone plan again, I take note where on one of the memoranda that went around, it said that they had instructed the committee to canvass the employees for constructive ideas prior to the plan's implementation, and had subsequently been advised that no ideas were forthcoming.

Now my qu estion to the Min ister is: Did the committee really go out there and ask for any of these ideas to implement this working alone plan? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I just want to advise the member that this is basically an administrative 1577

Monday, 4 May, 1987 function that I was not personally involved with. So I do have to get information from the staff on the details of the implementation of it. If the member is patient on that, I can do that. I do not have familiarity with the details of exactly how this was implemented there. I consider that an administrative matter. Mr. Chairman, I unde rstand that this is being done under the Workplace Health and Safety Committee recommendations. We have several Workplace Health and Safety Committees throughout the department. There's one committee established for the inspection function.

It is made up of two in spectors and one management person. These people form a Workplace Health and Safety Commi ttee for traffic inspection, and have made the recommendations with regard to the working alone policy. So, Mr. Chairman, the Member for Turtle Mountain should be aware that this is a staff-initiated function as a resu lt of the Wo rkp lace He alth and Safety Commi ttees that have been put in place. MR. D. ROCAN: Like, all our traffic inspectors that we have roving either in these little shacks or whatever, are these fellows right now, they're enforcement officers, so would they have a badge?

Do they have badges or a certain identification? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the staff advise me that they do have 1.0. cards, identifying themselves as inspectors. MR. D. ROCAN: But did they ever have badges, like a regular-type badge like a cop would have? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm advised that they used to have badges, yes. MR. D. ROCAN: And the reason that we're removing the badges is for what reason? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, the staff tells me that there was some involvement of alleged - I can't speak for this as being facts, because I'm not familiar with it.

So I'm simply advised that there was one inspector who was using his badge for inappropria te purposes, as perhaps impersonating a police officer or something to that effect. I don't know if they would have got their own on that as far as any other equipment, but they're not equi pped with any sidearms. MR. D. ROCAN: We're talking about equipment, and I know these rovers. I've met them many a time. Is there any specific reason why they don't have red lights on the cab of their trucks or alternating headlights or whatever? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Like the conservation officers? MR. D. ROCAN: Same idea. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the idea is to keep this function at a relatively low-key level insofar as the public is concerned, and they are not peace officers in any way, shape or form. They're insp ectors and, therefore, we haven't gone to the idea of having the flashing red lights and all of the other paraphern alia that's associated with peace officers. I don't kn ow whether the member is suggesting that there should be a move in that direction. Perhaps he has some thoughts on it, and we would be pleased to look at any suggestions he has, but staff up to this point in time did not believe that was appropriate. MR.

D. ROCAN: We're talking safety and, myself, I have already come roaring down a highway and, all of a sudden, this poor guy jumps out of his little truck with his little red light going in the middle of the dash. All I'm saying is that it would be much simpler for most of these truckers if this fellow had two great big red lights on top of his cab, but that's another matter. Also, I'd like to talk about this out-of-service criteria, vehicles transporting dangerous goods. Could the Minister tell us a little bit more about the criteria for transporting dangerous goods, some of the placards and documentation? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: All I can say at this point in time - and I think if the member wants me to go and get the regulations dealing with dangerous goods, they're inches and inches thick. It took a long time to develop all of the regulations for dangerous goods. However , I can say that all of our inspection staff have been certified under the courses for The Dangerous Goods Handling and Transportation Act and the regulations made thereunder as they pertain to truck transportation throughout the province.

So we do have the certification, and they are familiar with the requirements for driver and vehicle licences, placarding and documentation requir ed for dangerous go ods handling and transportation. So the fact is, the inspection staff is familiar. I am not familiar with the various placards and so on. The detail that is needed there, I think is something that is really beyond my in volvement in sofar as the development that was done and administrative skill with working groups for a number of years, successive years of staff, federal and provincial at various federal/ provincial working committees, levels.

So I have not, at the min isterial level, become involved in the precise kinds of symbols that were used and that kind of thing. It's all been done at the working level by technical people. MR. D. ROCAN: I'm sure the Minister must know or the staff at least know that carriers wishing to transport 16 foot wide house trailers must do so now only with 16-wheel dolly systems. I wonder if the Minister or his staff could tell us how one would go about getting approval or certification of a 16-wheel dolly system. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I would ask the staff to provide me with that information.

I expect now the member is onto a different area that is not related directly to the dangerous goods question? MR. D. ROCAN: No, just to do with inspections. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we have had a number of meetings on this issue in previous years to determine what was the safest way to transport these 1578

Monday, 4 May, 1987 extra wide house trailers. Up to that point in time when 16-footers were being requested to be transported on our highways, the widest designation was 15 feet. At that point in time, there were additional requirements for pilot vehicles and signage and lighting and so on. We have made some special requirements put in place for the 16 foot house trailers, and it involves the special 16-wheel dollies, as the member has mentioned. If a person has that, I believe they simply have to contact our permit office and demonstrate that they have that equipment, and they will be given a permit. MR. D.

ROCAN: Still under inspections, like the steering axle overloads now, at present are we starting to implement some new regulations for steering axle overloads? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We did have, Mr. Chairman, a regulation for steering axle overloads because, in the opinion of the insp ection staff, some danger ous situations with severe overloading of the steering axle, and also the damage that that would do to the road, and because of that have put in a provision that steering axles cannot be loaded beyond what the manufacturer has designated as the allowable weights.

I could get the figures as to how many thousand pounds that is for steering axle assemblies. MR. D. ROCAN: Mr. Chairman, like the existing hig hways special permit that expired on December 31, 1986, has this new one now come into effect or are we still waiting for it? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we have not passed that at this time. I was investigating the impact on the farm community before putting it through and I'm still waiting for some information on that. MR. D. ROCAN: Mr.

Chairman, still under Inspections, triple axle groups, can the Min ister tell us or inform us at least - the criteria for triple axle groups - how they would have to be mounted to the frame of a trailer or whatever? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, generally speaking, I'm advised that in spection staff requir es a common attachment for triple axle assemblies, but that they do not allow any additional weight for triple axles at this time, over double axles.

Basically there's no advantage at this point to that, except that there is a study at the present time, as the member is probably aware, a weights and dimension study that is being done by RTAC, that has been under way for the last numb er of years and we expect to have that study funded by various levels of government - I should say the provincial governments and the Federal Government over the last three years. It will be making recommendations for standardization of matters such as the issue of triple axles and how they should be regulated across the coun try. We are awaiting those recommendations. MR. D.

ROCAN: Mr. Chairman, like as restrictions are upon us and they're nearing completion now anyway, but can the Min ister tell us, is there any form of concessions during restrictions for any commodities whatsoever? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I guess you could say there's a lot of flexibility and leniency shown in this area, although it is done with the knowledge, to let that get out of hand, can quickly lead to a very rapid deterioriation of the highway, so we have to be careful; however, they also realize the importance of the movement of certain commodities during that spring restriction period and therefore are flexible in this area. There are some commodities such as groceries, milk and bread, and other staples that are exempt, farm fuel and fertilizer and seed grain where there are exceptions made. MR. D.

ROCAN: Under Traffic Inspections again, the "log cabin ," as we call it, on 2 and 10, are we contemplating building a new one there, or are going to be building it up in Brandon or is there anything in the works right now for a log cabin? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I missed the initial issue. MR. D. ROCAN: The log cabin which is at the junction of 2 and 10, one of your scales, which is in bad need of remodelling or a whole new scale, is there any talk at all of moving that scale from 2 and 10 up to Brandon, or are we even going to build a new scale? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There is some consideration by the staff to relocating that particular station and it perhaps could be in the vicinity of Brandon, but there's been no decision made on that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, moving into the District Offices, are there any changes bei ng contemplated in this area, in terms of combina tion or centralization of services? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, in terms of changes in the organization - I would take it that the member's referring to maybe the size of the boundaries of those or the shape of the boundaries - there's been no major changes there, a minor change in the area of where District 10 and 11 meet, in the northern area of the province and some consideration for future of the need to break District 10 which covers such a vast area in the north, into say, two districts, because the head office is at The Pas and there's another office at Thompson and the distances are very great. It might make sense to have two separate districts.

Basically there's been some major highways built in the last several years in the North, 10 or 15 years, so things have changed a little bit. So there is that thought that it might be more efficient, but there's been no move to amalgamate districts, if that's what the member might have been asking about. There is a complete review of the staffing needs of the area, of the various districts though and that is being undertaken at the present time. MR. G. CUMMINGS: What about amalgamation of services that are provided within the districts?

It may not fall under this area, but if it doesn't, I'd like to know where it does come in, and that is the maintenance of equipment and services in the areas. 1579

Monday, 4 May, 1987 Is that under the direction of the district supervisor? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the Mechanical

section is where the equipment is dealt with and that is under another section. 4.(

b) would be the one that deals with mechanical. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Ok ay, we'll ask our questions there. HON. J. PLOHMAN: They are separate from the district operation. MR. G. CUMMINGS: The funding to the LGD's, the Min ister and I have had some disagreement over the funding that is being provided on a shared basis to the LGD's and you referred to them in your opening statement. There is a 30 percent cutback in terms of some of the funding that the province is providing to LGD's.

There are some LGD's, if they were to continue with their budgets unchanged, would either have to go to reserves or reduce expenditures or increase revenue. Most of these LGD's, the revenue option is not a viable one because of the land base that's there in the first place. That's why they are LGD's.

But there is a great deal of concern on the part of many of the reeves of the LGD's out there that perhaps the government has a mind to put them back into a classification of a rural muni cipality, and I think the Min ister would do those LGD's and all of us a service if he could explain the direction that the government is trying to move with these government districts because they are unique.

Many of them are there because they were formerly parts of R.M's and they were in fact breaking the R.M's that they were part of because they could not support the expenditures that were required in order to have them developed, particularly the one that I'm familiar with, which is the LGD of Alonsa. The area was designated an LG D because parts of it were in fact removed from the muni cipalities because of the fiscal problems associated with it.

I wonder if the Min ister could respond, particularly, to the direction that the province is moving, and whether or not the independence should be returned to these LG D's. When we talk about their reserves, they can't go into debt; so obviously reserves to a lesser degree are desirable for them to have some reserves in case of unf orseen expenditures. Now we've gone through this process before with school divisions where the government changed policies in order to try and force school di visions to spend reserves that they had accumulated over the years.

I'd like the Mini ster to take a couple of min utes to expand on what direction he wants to move with these LGD's. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, first, I should say that the issue is one that has to be dealt with by the Minis ter of Municipal Affairs insofar as the future status of LGD's insofar as whether they should be looked at in terms of the muni cipalities at some time in the future. I really couldn't comment as to whether the Mini ster and his staff are looking at making recommendations in that regard in the near future.

It is a rather complicated thing which would take, I think, a lot of discussion with those affected and be a rather dramatic change. Therefore, it would be, I think, somewhat difficult. At best, it would probably have to be a transitional type of arrangement that would eventually lead to full status because of the loss in benefits that the LGD's would incur as a result of that change.

I don't know that there is any interest in moving all of these local governments down to the lowest common denomina tor as opposed to bringing those poorer ones up to a level that they can offer the kinds of services that the residents, the ratepayers in their area deserve, the same as many of the other muni cipalities that have a better level of service because they are richer in terms of their tax base. So I think that whole area has to be examined, and I've written to the LGD's with a view to establishing some dialogue in this area.

Also, I will be meeting with the Mini ster of Muni cipal Affairs further to discuss this further as to where he would like to go and to also provide him some input from our perspective. But it seems to me, at this point in time, that you could no t ig no re the fact that there were rather substantial reserves in some of the LGD's that could be used by the LGD to meet needs rather than raising taxes, and substantial reserves, up to $1 million, I believe, in some of the LGD's, which is much higher on average than the mun icipalities in the surrounding areas.

The municip alities do have some of whatever reserve in many cases but not to that extent. We have to realize that over $3 million is going in in kind of an un der-the-table subsidy to LGD's through High ways, through road funding, by funding main market roads and 50-50 roads. I don't think that's the best way and most approp riate way to provide equalization funding, if we could call it that, or subsidy to local governments. I think it should be done through a recognition of their relative wealth in a grant form above board as opposed to a hidden subsidy such as road work.

I think we should be looking at that as we move along in this regard. It seems to me that as well the method of provi ding tax sharing to muni cipa lities and LG D's is no t necessarily the fairest and that it's based largely on a per capita basis. That means municip alities with more people get more money whether it takes more money to provide the infrastructure or not. It would seem to me that in some of the LGD's they have widespread geographic areas to cover.

They still have to provide a basic infrastructure and, therefore, there should be some method of provi ding them with some assistance other than a per capita grant. If that could be done, a lot of the funding that goes to them now for roads could be substituted with a more progressive form of a grant system. That is what I would like to see develop over a period of time, but there is no grandiose plan at this time to see the LGD's revert to municipal status. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr.

Chairman, I don't think the Mini ster has shed a great deal of light on where the province would be heading in terms of dealing with these LGD's. The other aspect that has to be dealt with is that if they are to become more self-sufficient, for those that 1580

Monday, 4 May, 1987 have reserves, their reserves would be decimated immediately in prov iding equipment and facilities. For those who do not have reserves, of course, then the situation would be even more dire.

As a result of that, I hope, if there are to be dis cussions, that the govern ment, either through Hig hways or Municipal Affairs, in an effort to be clear and ab ove boar d , would make sure that the communication with these LG D's is ongoing, and not just to say that there will be commun ication but in fact get down to some serious discussions about what direction any changes may take because there is a great deal of concern out there.

To quote some of the reeves, they are saying that if we are to become munici palities, then tell us so that we can plan towards that end and not leave them sitting in a very uncomfortable position not really knowing where they're headed. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I just could mention, Mr. Chairman, in reaction to that, for example, the LGD of Alonsa has an accumulated reserve and surplus of $707,000, and they received 80 percent of their 50-50 funding this year that they got the previous two years, an average of the previous two years.

They were reduced by $23,000 from $1 20,000, on average for the two previous years, to $97,000 this year. So that·was $23,000.00. If you were to have to eat up that $23,000 by your reserve, for example, in this instance, in terms of putting this in perspr .. ·;tive, it would take many, many years. As a matter of fact, the interest would probably generate more each year than you would use on this 50-50 road program and you would probably never use up that $707,000.00.

I'm just using that as an example to show the action we've taken to this point is not so dramatic that it is going to cause them to go into a situation that they cannot reasonably handle. So I put that there for the member; but I do think that there is some legitimacy to the funding that the LGD's get, the help they get, because they are, in many cases, on land that is a relatively poor tax base. Maybe I didn't shed light into the direction the government would go, but I just want to impress to the Member for Ste. Rose that I think that there should be some kind of offset to these LGD's.

If they were to lose the $3 million in road assistance that they get now, that they would get something else to replace. That would be an above-board funding mechanism grant, not on a per capita basis. That's why I referred to per capita as not being fair. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, I don't want to spend much more time in this area, but the Minis ter's figures differ from mine. The $97,000 I agree with, but the upper figur e I thought was $1 50,000 from the year previous, and I don't have the figures in front of me so I stand to be corrected. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The only reason, Mr.

Chairman, that the figures may differ is that there may have been a larger one-time grant, an incr ease in 1985-86, or 19 86-87, I should say, that caused the distortion that would make the LG D or enable the LGD to use figur es 1581 that were much larger. That's why we averaged from'85- 86 with '86-87, those two years, because there were some anomalies that occurred for special projects or some special requests.

We gave an additional amount for one year only, and that really shouldn't be used as the base by the LGD, and yet it was used in some instances for their comparative purposes and made it look like it was a much bigger drop. The figure that I'm using, that I can provide of 954 is similar to the figure that they got in 1983-84. The total amount that they're getting now is similar to what they got in'8 3-84 and more than they got in'8 4-85.

But in'8 5-86, '86-87 we averaged the two and got the total, and then there was $250,000 taken off that, and we end up with a total funding for 50-50 roads of $954,000 - about 80 percent of what they had the previous two years, average. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Under District Offices, I had earmarked the transportation expenditure that is listed, $450,000 last year projected, a $370,000 drop; a "r eduction of staff and related expenses through attrition and reallocation of staff resources." HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, what is the question, Mr. Chairman? MR. G.

CU MMINGS: The question is: A further explanation, first of all, of the size, but we're seeing an $80,000 drop in expenditures there. The explanatory notes do not explain to me how we were able to achieve that saving. I'm not objecting to the saving, but we have a staff reduction. That staff reduction is achieved at what level, or is this an average across the board? Mr. Chairman, if a staff reduction creates an $80,000 saving in transportation charges, I'd like to know how that shows up in transportation-related savings? Is this taking trucks off the road or what? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, M.

Dolin: The Minister of Hig hways. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we have 12 districts, as the member knows, so we're dealing with about $7,000 or $8,000 per district in a reduction which is not dramatic but it is significant, and it's basically as a resu lt of fewer mil es travelled. So it's lower transportation costs because of fewer staff. MR. G. CUMMINGS: That means fewer in spections of roads? Is that what this travel allowance is attributed to? HON. J. PLOHMAN: This must be people who work on surveys and design work on the hi ghways, engineering aides as opposed to in spectors. MR. G.

CUMMINGS: Under Other Jurisdictions - and then following this, the Member for Ni akwa will have a question for the Minister - it is stated that the department "provides specialized equipment services not readily available from the priv ate sector on a 100 percent cost recoverable basis." What kind of specialized equipment are we referring to, or is this simply road equipment? Is it something beyond?

Monday, 4 May, 1987 HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we're dealing with services to other departments at this point in time: road equipment that is not necessarily available by the private sector; snow removal equipment that may not be available, used in the government parking lots for Government Services, for example; also fuel for vehicles at Hig hways garages; road construction for Northern Affairs; some bridge construction equipment for Natural Resou rces ; and in the Parks Br anc h, in Na tural Resources, some road construction. It doesn't mean that all of this equipment is not available in the private sector.

It just means that it is available through the department and is called upon, from time to time, by other departments for its use. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Nia kwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm not going to prolong the debate. I just have a couple of very small questions. Actually I might not even be in the right place, but I didn't have the chance - it's under Winter Roads. Would I be able to ask any questions on Winter Roads at this point? If you prefer not to, Mr. Minis ter, I can wait till the Minis ter's Salary. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I just gave the critic an eye here because we tried to do things in a packaged way, but go ahead.-(Interjection)- Yes, we went over them last week, but we can go over that again, a bit. MR. A. KOVNATS: It's not going to take long. Mr. Chairman, concern ing Winter Roads, how are the contractors picked for the construction of these winter roads? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, what we had done is we had dealt with that particular qu estion and I advised the members that we had allocated these with an arrangement with a number of Native companies in the North, to provide them with an opportunity to gain some experience in contracting and operating equipment, operating a business and company, provide employment in those areas, in the remote communities where there's high unemployment, so that they get the direct economic benefits of this construction activity in their area. So it's not done by an open tender system in this case.

It's an arrangement by way of an agreement that was established a number of years ago and now we have just continued that agreement, year by year, with a small increase some years, sometimes no increase, and we negotiate with them to try and keep it as low as possible. Then they are paid on the number of miles they open by a certain date and how well they maintain it for a duration of a number of weeks to keep that open to a certain width. So it's a system that seems to be working for those communities. It may not be as cost-effective as it would be had we tendered for all of these.

An example would be Norwin Construction on the east side of Lake Winnip eg, which in volves a whole numb er of communities, along the whole stretch of the east side of Lake Winnipeg, and they work together - those communities - with one construction company called Norwin. They split up the work amongst the various bands and they each do a portion of it, so they all reap some of the benefits. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Mini ster, I'm not critical of that, not completely anyway. I think that something has to be done to help up in the North, but what my question was is who picks the Indian Bands that do the work?

Is it done by the department or is it done by associations with the different bands that the roads go into? What preferential treatment is given, that's all I'm asking? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, the bands that are served by that particular road would have the opportunity to get involved, and that's an historical thing already. This has happened now for five or ten years, nine years with that group.

Say, for example, the one I gave, I guess Norwin Construction for a number of years now, so I wasn't a part of how they were chosen, but the fact is all of those bands in those areas represent the communities that are served by those roads, so it seems to make sense. It stands to reason that they should be given an opportunity. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, S. Ashton: The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: We change the chairman here like we change the . . . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Yes, I'm just trying to keep track as to whether there was any other member that was ahead of you on the list, but I think you're next.

The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr. Chairman, I'm prepared to pass that section. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(e)(

f) and (g)- pass. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, (b), (c), (d), (e), (

f) and (g). MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Yes, I believe those other items were passed. If there's any question about that, we'll make sure that the minutes ... HON. J. PLOHMAN: No, they weren't passed . MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Sorry, the previous Chair checked them, so I assumed they were passed. If I'm in error, I will restate that the entire 2. Operations and Maintenance was just passed unanimo usly by the committee here. No. 3. Planning and Design and Land Surveys - the Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Mr.

Chairman, the Planning and Design, as I read the description of the department, will outline a program of construction and proposals to bring the high way system of the province up to a standard that they would think is at a level that the ministry should be aiming towards. There are two things that I would like to ask the Mini ster to put on the record. No. 1, in looking back at the 1985-86 Highways Annual Report, it says that a study is concluded that design standards can be downgraded for 80 percent 1582

Monday, 4 May, 1987 of the highway system, thus reducing the cost of construction of these roadways as compared to current practice. This would be accomplished by setting back the timing of paving of very low volume roads, as well as reducing the shoulder widths to be provided on provincia l roads eligible for pavi ng, however the standards would still be within nationally acceptable standards. Has the Min ister implemented that recommendation; has the department implemented that recommendation in the design that we are seeing put forward now, i.e., the narrow shoulder paving?

Is there a downgrading of the width of the roads that are being constructed?

If so, I would suggest that it may be a dangerous path upon which to embark, because it seems to me that long-term planning, particularly on our primary roads network and our major seco ndar y netwo rks, to downgrade the design standards in many cases - unless it can be proven that the saving is worth the long-term pain and I would doubt if that could be proven - that we are setting ourselves on a path whereby we will have a road system that will not in the future be prepared to accept the type of vehicular traffic that we can anticipate.

We consistently see major changes being brought forward in the trucking industry with the size, not only of the loads but the length of the vehicles, and some of these changes are very much in the area of efficiency, but the road system does have to be there to accept those types of vehicles. I would like an explanation from the Min ister as to what the department is headed into with this statement? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, this occurred last year and unf ortunately we didn't have a discussion of this during the last Estimates when we had all of the information and it was fresh in our minds, it was a brand-new impl ementation.- (I nterjection)- Yes, the member is showing us - and I'm not criticizing him for raising it. I'm just simply saying it occurred the previous fiscal year and therefore it isn't as much available right now, although I could get more details on that. There was a major review that was un dertaken of our standards.

I guess what we could say is that in the area of maintenance, we've continued the standards that were there, as I referred to them on Thursday last week, and we haven't changed them for about 19 years basically.

But in terms of the standards for which hig hways should be built to, there was a review that was done over a period of about a year-and-a-half or so in the department to look at whether the standards in all cases were realistic in sofar as today's needs, keeping in mind scarcity of resources, and to see whether there were any savings that could be achieved by perhaps reducing the shoulder width in some areas, savings that could be achieved from the point of view of maintenance as well as the actual initial construction of those roads.

By doing that, instead of having for example a 10- foot wide shoulder on all low level PR's, they have reduced that to 6 feet or 8 feet in some instances so that there is an actual saving there in terms of the amount of material that has to be moved.

It's really an effort to make the dolla rs go further without sacrificing the standards to the degree that we feel safety would be impacted. 1583 Now perhaps you know, this is all relative and marginal and perhaps there may be some indi cation in future years that a reduction in standards, to some degree, in shoulder width might lead us to reconsider that at some point, but my advice from the department is that it is not something that they feel would negatively impact on safety. Mr. Chairman, I did want to mention a couple of other things. In some instances, there was actually an increase in the standards.

For example, previous to this review, there was some partial shoulder pavi ng, 3-foot shoulders paved on the Yellowhead, for example, that was not part of the standards that were outlined by the department. This is now an official part of the hig hway polic y for standards for certain kinds of highways, partial shoulder paving,

whereas it wasn't before. It was being done but it wasn't part of the standards that were established. There was some widening of the bridge standards so that they wouldn't come in so narrowly on a number of PR's. People probably have seen that, experienced those narrow bridges, that they would have to be built out to the proper width.

Then there was a lessoning of the standards requirements for PR's passing through valleys when instead of having to use up valuable farm land, that we could tighten up the curves a bit on some valley construction to reduce the impact on agricultural land and still be acceptable to service the needs of the motorists in that area. So there were a lot of things consid ered.

As I said, we could get perhaps some estimates on the dollar impact on our highway construction as a result of those changes and some additional examples of where standards were reduced, a typical road, and where they were increased if the members would like to get into that. As I indi cated, that actually took place in the previous fiscal year and it's been the established guideline for the previous year now. MR. G. CUMMINGS: That was basically my question. The department has accepted that recommendation. There is a question now, Mr. Chairman, from the Member for Min nedosa. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Min nedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just while we're on Planning and Design, I would like the Min ister just to confirm for the record that the planning and design on Highway 250 from 16 north to 45 has been accepted. It's been designed or planned for some years, but I just want to assure myself that the plan has been accepted. HON. J. PLOHMAN: While the staff is getting the status out on that particular one, Mr.

Chairman, whoever you are, I just want to mention that as a result of this classification study - I just wanted to refer back to that for a minute - the members may notice in the new Hig hways map a number of highways that have been reclassified to PTH standards as a result of that study that was done. Not only were the standards changed in some in stances, but a numb er of roads were

Monday, 4 May, 1987 reclassified and others were added to the PR system in the north particularly. So I believe those routes now more accurately represent the changed traffic patterns in the province and mor e accurately reflect the classification that they should have as major arterial routes in the province. I'm just trying to determine, Mr. Chairman, the exact status of the survey and design plan for the

section of 250 from High way 16 to 45. My understanding is that the plan has been already approved and I can get confirmation of that. Because it's already in the acquisition stage, the plan would have been approved already, but it's difficult for me to say and I don't have the specifics with staff as to the latest up-to-date development on that as to whether the plan has been filed. They are well into the acquisition. I would have to get that. MR. D. BLAKE: Mr. Chairman, if the Mini ster can just get an update on that so I can forward it to the committee to assure them.

They're getting a little nervous - they've been waiting so long and had so many meetings - that they haven't got the thing finished yet. If they acquired the land, that's pretty well ... . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I imagine they've been meeting a lot with themselves. We haven't had that many meetings. I think we met twice. MR. CHAIRMAN: I take it to understand that you are willing to pass item No. 2., Operations and Maintenance?

Resolution No. 91: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $70,235,800 for Hi ghw ays and Tran sportation, Operati ons and Maintenance, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1988- pass. We are now on Planning and Design and Land Surveys. The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMM INGS: Mr. Chairman, does this department recommend the maintenance to certain standards?

For example, roads that need upgrading in order to maintain a reasonable standard of road, does this department have any input in that area where it may have come to the department's attention that certain areas of road need to be rebuilt, major reco nstructions? Would this department make a recommendation to the Min ister on those situations? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, I think that this question again is tied in with the previous question on the overall classification study that was done, which I understand through the process resulted in an improved communication system within the department overall, the district and the planning and design central. The planning and design did not do that overall classification study on their own. They did it in conjunction with the districts, who assessed each road in their district to determine what classification would be required to meet the needs, and so they had input into that.

And now, there's an overall plan and their whole system in the districts have been established with the standards that it will be eventually upgraded to, the road. Some are at the standards that they required, many are under standard. When the reconstruction takes place and the upgrading takes place, the districts know precisely to what starrdard• it will be upgraded, and they design accordingly. Previously, I'm advised that there was no overall plan consistent throughout the province in this area.

So what had happened many times, the district would have to actually consult with planning and design to get their input into whether it should be one standard or another. Now, it's all known ahead of time, and it's a better system. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: Just one question, I'm not too sure if this is the appropriate

section here. I'm wondering about feeder roads from the city feeding into provincial highways and the planning. Is there any negotiation going on with the city about any kind of joint planning for some of these connect-a roads within the city limits, outside of Department of Highways jurisdiction? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, the member's question is particularly timely at this point insofar as the major studies that are being done on the Perimeter, which involve major sections of the Perimeter at the present time, one in the southwest, well the whole southern area of the Perimeter, and one in the northeast quadrant where the Perimeter hasn't been completed.

So, the city is very much involved in the study team and those in identifying, not only the root and the treatment that intersections should be receiving under an upg raded system there, both on the existing Perimeter with regard to interchanges in those areas, and also in the area where there is no construction as yet, no Perimeter Hig hway, insofar as how the routes should intersect with the Perimeter. So they are involved very much in those particular areas, and that covers a large part of the Perimeter.

In addition to that, where there is upgrading un dertaken on a more ad hoe fashion, there is direct commun ication between at the director level to the senior person from the Department of Transportation for the City of Winnipeg. So, I think it has been established clearly that there needs to be that kind of interaction and joint planning, and we intend to pursue that. It has not always been evident in the past. MR. M.

DOLIN: Yes, particularly following on that end, the north end of McPhillips and the entry ways into the Perimeter, which is a problem I think I discussed with the Minister a couple of years ago, is where the city is saying it's their jurisdiction where the road is deteriorating, where the entry ways are causing a lot of problems to the people who live alongside that road.

Now that there is some kind of joint planning with the city, is there some possibility that a joint committee of the province and the city can get the city to take some action on that north McPhillips area to solve some of the problems of the deterioration? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I think what was clear in my statement before is that, where there were 1584

Monday, 4 May, 1987 ad hoe appr oaches taken to a priority that was established by one jurisdiction or the other, there was com muni cation taking place. That should not be presumed that is necessarily a long-term planning process, which is something a little bit different. We have their input now on the study, so I think that's going to establish a planning process for the areas of the Perimeter that are impacted by those study areas at the present time, but not in the area of McPhillips at this time. That is not one of those areas covered by the Perimeter studies.

It seems to me that what we have to do there is to put more pressure on the City of Winni peg to priorize some of those outlying areas. It doesn't seem to be their highest prior ity, I guess, politically, to move on some of those areas. We, I think, should do that through the Urban Affairs Comm ittee mechanism, because we provide signif icant block funding, some $50 million or $60 million - I'm not sure - to the City of Winnipeg, and a lot of it is for capital. We could very well help them establish some of their priorities perhaps in that area. MR. M.

DOLIN: On that, the Minister points out the ad hockery that's gone on and the need for some kind of continuing cooperative planning, and points out some potential mechanisms for getting the city to do this. What struck me, interestingly enough·. is two years ago there were substantial repairs being done on the Perimeter Hig hway in that

section by the province, and yet the city was not doing its

part in keeping its roads up. I would hope the Minis ter. whatever process could be used, would get the city to cooperate to make sure it holds up its end in making sure access to the Perimeter Hig hway is adequate, and that the city does keep up its roads as well as the province is keeping up the roads where they're doing the job. So I would hope the Minis ter would do something to encourage the city or pressure the city to stop the ad hocke ry, and let's have a sort of a permanent joint kind of planning thing to make sure the operations are consistent. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Just a last comment on that.

I think it's easier said than done at the political level, and it would in volve a pretty heavy-handed approach by the province to establish the priorities. Hopeful ly, it could be done at a more subtle level. As I said, there is a communi cations mechanism at the staff level, but I don't think that we do have enough coordination, frank ly. There are areas where we have to do some work on the interchanges on the Perimeter in the future, even Hig hway 7, a little bit further over, and there's lnkster coming up, and there's responsibility there by the city. And yet, they're not necessarily making them a prior ity.

So I would like to see us put a little more effort in that area. MR. G. FINDLAY: Mr. Chairman, I like the Minister's comments on where we stand with the request from Miniota Municipality that Hig hway 355 be extended from High way 83 into the Birdtail Sioux Reserve. There have been some discussions take place to date, and the Minio ta Municip ality doesn't believe that they should have to continue to maintain that road because it's in a state of disrepair now, and it needs upgrading and obviously gravelling. They would like thprovince to take over that chunk of road.

I un derstand there's some discussion going on to determine if it can be done on a joint federal-provincial relationship, and I wondered where that discussion is at and how soon there might be some action taken by the provinc e or the pr ovi nce and the Federal Government jointly to take over responsibility for this road from the R.M. of Mini ota. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, as the member knows, in the new program, we do have the sections up to that point. This

section leading to the reserve is one that has given us particular problems. I have written to the Minister responsible for Indian and Northern Affairs on April 24, indicating that we would like him to consider our policy recommendation or suggestion that we have made from the province to apply to have his consideration to have that policy apply. This particular case is an excellent example where we could work in a cooperative way on a road leading to a reserve. I have, as yet of course, having sent this a little over a week ago or 10 days ago, not received any reply.

But I'm hopeful that we will get some reply from him, and this will trigger some interest in this area and some action in a relatively short period of time, so that we could get on with this work jointly. MR. G. FINDLAY: Can I take it from your comments that the province is committed to doing something with this road to take it away from the responsibility of the R.M. of Mini ota? Hopefully , it'd be done jointly, but you're committed to following through and seeing that something is done. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We're committed, Mr.

Chairman, in doing our share jointly with the Federal Government but not alone, because we don't think this is a provincial responsibility in its entirety at all. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to pick up these costs alone, when in deed the Federal Government has, in our opinion, a very heavy responsibility in this particular situation. So we are committed to moving forward on it. MR. G. FINDLAY: If they agreed to go jointly with you, how soon would something happen on that piece of road? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Once we got approval in principle from them to participate with us, and on this particular road we would recommend that - Mr. Chairman, our proposed policy for federal-provincial participation for roads leading to Indian reserves would apply if they were to accept it. In this case, on a 50-50 basis, that fou r-mile

section to the reserve boun dary for construction pur poses would be funded 50-50. If there was any work to be done on the reserve, we were recommending that be 100-percent federal and, insofar as maintenance is concerned, our proposal is that it should be 50-50 for maintenance outside of the reserve, that four miles, and 100 percent on the reserve as well. That is the pro posal and, once that has been accepted, then we would immediately proceed next fiscal year to do the design work and move to the 1585

Monday, 4 May, 1987 acquisition of property that's required up to the reserve, so that the construction could begin. So it's going to take a couple of years to get the work done actually, once there's agreement. MR. G. FINDLAY: Are there any such other sections of road in the province in a similar category, where the R.M.'s are paying for the upke ep of a road going into a reserve? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I can't think of any right offhand where they would be doing it, but there are many di fferent situations, very uniqu e situations in the province.

That is why we're trying to develop a policy that would apply consistently because, up to this point, it's been an ad hoe approach where every situation was dealt with on its own and no con si stency whatsoever. I don't have a list of similar ones. I really can't say whether there are any other situations where an R.M. is providing the maintenance for a road that exclusively serves a reserve. MR. G. FINDLAY: Just a final comment, I would stress on the Min ister the urgency of getting the resolution to decide on how the cost-sharing shall be, because the r

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-40a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 40a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6f3b89d213a96bee8feeabada4b8b63091baea56

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