Manitoba Hansard — 3 May 1983 (Sitting 59B, 32nd Legislature, 2nd Session)

32-2-59b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 Second Session - Thirty-Second Legislature oflhe Leglslatlve Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS 31-32 Elizabeth II Publl•hed under the authority of The Honourablft D. Jame• Walding S,,.alcer VOL. XXXI No. 598 - 8:00 p.m., TUESDAY, 3 MAY, 1983. Pnnted by the Office of the 0.-ns Print«. Province of M9tlitobll

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Second legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANSTETT, Andy ASHTON, Steve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, John M. CARROLL, Q.C., Henry N. CORRIN, Brian COWAN, Hon. Jay DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent DODICK, Doreen DOERN, Russell DOLIN, Mary Beth DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert ENNS, Harry EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. EYLER, Phil FILMON, Gary FOX, Peter GOURLAY, D.M. (Doug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOVNATS, Abe LECUYER, Gerard LYON, Q.C., Hon. Sterling MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. Al MALINOWSKI, Donald M. MANNESS, Clayton McKENZIE, J. Wally MERCIER, Q.C., G.W.J. (Gerry) NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte ORCHARD, Donald PAWLEY, Q.C., Hon. Howard R. PARASIUK, Hon. Wilson PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Myrna A. PLOHMAN, John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Vic SCOTT, Don SHERMAN, L.R. (Bud) SMITH, Hon. Muriel STEEN, Warren STORIE, Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill USKIW, Hon. Samuel WALDING, Hon. D. James Constituency Ste.

Rose Springfield Thompson La Verendrye Mi nnedosa Rhineland Gimli Brandon West Ellice Churchill St. Boniface Riel Elmwood Ki ldonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concordia Swan River Vi rden Ki rkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Portage la Prairie Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson Charleswood St. James St. Johns Morris Roblin-Russell St. Norbert Assiniboia Gladstone Pembina Selkirk Transcona Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Burrows Rossmere lnkster Fort Garry Osborne River Heights Flin Flon Interlake Lac du Bonnet St.

Vi tal Party NOP NOP NOP PC PC PC NOP IND NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC PC PC NOP NOP PC NOP PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP PC PC NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP PC PC PC PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC NOP NOP NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP NOP NOP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 3 May, 1983. Time - 8:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Order please. The question before the Ho use is the Motion to go into Committee, and the Grievance debate arising therefrom. The Honour able Member for Lakeside has 12 minutes remaining. MATTER OF GRIEVANCE Cont'd MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Prior to the supper hour adjournment, and the adjournment for Private Memb ers' Hour, I left with the comments about the rather unique position that this government finds itself in, in the sense that we, in the opposition, although we disagree with members opposite on many specific and indi vidual issues, but on the issue that has prompted several of us, the Member for Turtle Mountain, and myself, to expend our one and only opportunit y that we have to express a grievance in this Chamber, to speak out on the grave and deepening fiscal problems that this government finds itself in.

On that issue we are prepared to extend a hand of co-operation to this government, that, Mr. Speaker, I say I don't wish to arouse undue partisan reaction but, to a degree, that certainly wasn't extended to the government that I was pleased and proud to be part of just some short 16 months ago when we knew the kind of situation that we were faci ng. Mr. Sp eaker, we are prepared to co-operate, as I said earlier in my remarks, to learn to live within our means, or reasonably close to it.

We're not that ideologically bound, as members opposite are often to remind us, that governments cannot, under certain circumstances, live with some deficit financing. The Minister of Finance of the previous Tory administration came into this Chamber with a substantial deficit financing proposal in his last Budget. Mr.

Speaker, the action taken yesterday by financial institutions and agencies outside of this jurisdiction that will impinge upon our ability to raise the kind of monies necessary to keep a modern government going are serious enough that we put aside, at least on this issue, some of the heated partisan differences that have separated us. Mr. Speak er, we are prepared to co operate, but we want it to be fair. We want it to be fair, Mr. Speaker, on the issue of wage settlements which really mean half of this government's expenditures.

Let's be fair that when in the private sector workers are being asked to, at this time, accept no wage increases, to accept decreases, as I can recite

chapter and verse of firms - Macleods, for instance, for one, their 2,000 employees accepted a 10 percent decrease in wages. A MEMBER: The steelworkers in Flin Flon. MR. H. ENNS: Steelworkers, Co-op emplo yees, and this gov ernment accepts and signs a deal th at guarantees a no-cut contract, 27 percent increase for civil servants. Mr. Speaker, I only say to the same civil servants, I only say that this same government - I say this directly to Mr. Gary Doer, President of the Manitoba Emp loyees Association - will come back to them as Mr. Levesque has done and ask for a roll back in wages.

I want that on the record, Mr. Spe aker. I don't think that's particularly an approp riate way of doing it. Mr. Levesque did it because he had an election to win as these fellows had an election to win. Why not live within reasonable steps? Why not accept what most of the other nation is accepting, even a six and five proposal, or indeed as a private sector is being asked to accept. Schneider's workers were being asked to accept and accepted, after a long strike, reasonable wage settlements. Let's be fair about it, Mr. Speaker. The government has a responsibility to exercise some leadership in this respect. Mr.

Speaker, let's be fair; we are prepared to co-o perate. Let's be fair about the kind of increases in government expenditures that this government is undertaking. When this government and some departments are expending an extra 18 percent, far and above what we are taking in terms of revenue, even with the new taxes introduced by this government, let's be fair at least in that sense. Don't pick on departments like Agriculture, like Hig hways, like Natural Resources and ask them to take a 20 to 60 percent decrease because this government doesn't get too many people elected from rural Manitoba. Let's be fair, Mr.

Speaker. Time doesn't permit me to remind the honourable members opposite that it is expenditures in that kind of basic infrastructure that are far more meaningful than supporting make-work projects, cutting grass in the City of Winnipeg at $400 to $600 a week. People are getting $600 a week to cut grass in the City of Winnipeg; that's what this government calls a make work project.

I ask Deputy Min isters of Education, Directors of Education, as to whether they think that's fair and whether they think that kind of expenditure of public funds, when we are deep in debt, is making a meaningful contribution to the welfare of this province? Mr. Speaker, let's be fair. We will co-o perate with this government in trying to bring about fiscal responsibility in the affairs of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I've said this before in another speech on another bill, and I can now say that I've caucused it with my honourable members of my caucus. I hadn't done so when I last proposed it.

No more promises about the fact that institutions like ManOil will enable this government to do all those things, to build the new schools, to build the new personal care homes, to pay for the 27 percent increases in civil servants' salaries without any increased taxes. Let's not make those kind of promises any more. We, on this side, will not hold the government responsible for that promise. If this government backs off that promise, we won't chide them for it.

We will simply acknowledge, yes, that is a responsible move on the part of this government if the Minister of Energy withdraws that bill that is now before this Chamber and says, "We will save the taxpayers of Manitoba $20 million of risk capital," - $20 million - that is as much 2357

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 at risk as taking it down to Las Vegas and putting in on the wheel. I will do that, and if he wants to signal the investment houses, the people that we have to go to borrow our money from and say, "We are prepared to get a little more serious about our situation, we take note of the fact that you've reduced our credit rating yesterday, so we'll put away, at least for the time being." I'm not going to be that hard on my social friends opposite. I know they believe they have to do that, but the trouble is that is the urgency of the debate that we're in.

This government can still take some steps right now to make sure that our credit rating doesn't tumble a further point or two and cost us more millions of dollars, because I want those millions of dollars available for us to spend on education, on schools, on roads, in agriculture, on drainage ditches. I don't want to pay them to some money lenders in New York or in Zurich or in Tokyo and that's what these fellows are doing to us. Well, Mr.

Speaker, I said prior to the adjournment tha t on this issue this gov er nment has a unique opportunity to reach across the 30 feet that separate us in this Chamber, and in fact make peace on this issue. We will help them in a responsible way to try to preserve the reduced credit rating that we now have to ensure that it doesn't slide fu rther, and if at all possible, do what Premier Schre yer did in 1975, increase the credit rating of this province.

If Premier Schreyer thought that it was a noteworthy event, and he sat in that chair right over there and spoke about it in this Chamber - pardon me, I was on this side and he was there, I get these things confu sed because I've been on both sides so often, Mr. Speaker, I get mixed up - but nonetheless it was an important occasion for Premier Schreyer to comment on and to make a speech about. It's such a sad legacy that the successors of that government pay so little heed, so little attention to the issue that we are debating on at this time. Mr.

Speaker, the people of Manitoba will be the sorrier for it if they don't pay particular attention to this issue. The people of Manitoba will be sorry for it and the government will be sorry for it if they don't go back and reread the speech that my colleague, the Member for Turtle Mountain, made on the Budget on this same matter. Mr.

Speaker, I only hope the contribution that we are making from this side of the House as it will be read and as I said earlier let's nobody fool ourselves, this debate, this discussion is being read tomorrow and the next day in New York and in other places, where within a few short months this government is going to go looking for an additional $1 billion of borrowing. My sad commentary is they'll read the Minister of Finance's contribution and they will have to try and judge and balance. How serious are we in Manitoba about meeting our obligations?

How much of a risk are we going to be in the future in terms of extending multi, multimillions of dollars of credit to us? Mr. Speaker, what I've heard today from honourable members opposite, what I see by the empty seats in this Chamber, with the Minister of Finance not being prepared to be in this Chamber to listen to this debate - (I nterjection) - Well, Mr. Speaker, I know that you are about to admonish me because I'm not supposed to make reference about members that are absent and I withdraw that remark. But, Mr. Speaker, the issue is that important. - (Interjection) - Mr.

Speaker, I only hope that I have contributed to the debate in a manner and a way that will stand well for the people of Manitoba in the future. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The question before the House is the motion to go into committee. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? (Agreed) Agreed and so ordered. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Committee, please come to order. We are now beginnin g Item No. 5.(a)( 1) - the Honour able Minister. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I haven't taken the initiative to indicate in a broad way the initiatives or concerns that we have in respect to each section. I don't know whether it's thought desirable by members of the committee, but I could indicate in respect to Parks here, because certainly there would be some interest in knowing the status of some of the park development plans. I could briefly comment on that and then anticipate some questions. If that is agreeable, I will proceed. Mr. Chairman, we have contin ued with the consultation process in respect to the development of the Whiteshell master plan.

Further discussions did take place, public hearings, further inputs were received. As Minister, and through the Department, we have received an extensive number of submissions in respect to the master planning process. I have had the benefit of visiting at Lake Mantario. I had an extensive amount of submission made to me there by people who are concerned about the pro posed zoning. I have endeavoured to answer all of those queries, thanking both those who support the planned zoning in its present form or who wish some variation in respect to it.

In respect to Beaudry Park, we're continuing with the initial planning of the park area. Similarly, in respect to Hecia, once we comp lete the Whiteshell master plan, we'll be turning next to the Hecia natural park and developing a master plan for that park. We're in the initial stages, I believe now, of the Hecia master plan process. Other than that, I think, Mr. Chairman, I will indicate that the Parks Program continues to be a very popular area so far as public usage is concerned. We anticipate that the same degree of activity or more will continue in this year.

Ther e have been slight cha nges in programming, but nothing of sufficient significance that I would want to take the time of the committee to highlight. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Last year when we dealt with the Estima tes we had some questions for the Minister concerning general parks 2358

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 policies. At that time the Minister had not had an opportunity to make any changes in policies and we had asked him then if he would consider not making any majo r pol icy changes until we had an opportuni ty for further discussion. Now, here we are a year later and I ju st would like to ask the Mi nister now what changes in general parks policies that he has brought about over the course of the last year. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, I can't indicate that there has been any significant policy change.

As I ind icat ed, we are conti nuin g our consulta tion. Con sultat ion pr ocess is effectively comp leted in respect to Whiteshell and the policy development that is encom passed in the master planning process will be compl ete in the very near future. In respect to other park planning, as I've indicated we are looking at Beaudry Park from the point of view of an intensive-use recreational park to the west of Winnip eg and high prio rity will be gi ven to th at development and the policy position in respect to that park will be an intensive recreational-type park.

In respect to Hecia, as I indicated, master planning will proceed. In respect to other parks pol icy there has been no major directive that I recall that I've signalled any significant change in the ongoing programming within parks. We have indicated, as a part of the Whiteshell master planning process, that we are considering the ability of residents, those who own cottages in the Whiteshell, to be able to sublet or to rent out their cottage if they so desire.

At the present time the policy contained - it's embodied in the leasing arrangements of all cottages on Crown land - is a prohibition from any subletting and we've indicated we're prepared to consider a recommendation to discontinue that because, quite frankly, I think we expect and believe, Mr. Chairman, that policy is not strictly enforceable nor has it been strictly enforced in any event.

One of the pol icy direc tions in respect to the Whiteshell, again arising out of the concerns of the master planning process there, is the determination that the extent of cottaging in the Whiteshell is such that pursuant to the overall planning process of the Whiteshell, we would not be developing or permitting any further extensive cottaging in that park.

We have, as a matter of ongoing policy - it's not new to this government, it's a policy carried on for some years - made cottage lots available in areas that are considered to be recreational parks, and I refer to developments in Grindstone, Paint Lake and there was another one on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. In any event, those two come readily to mind, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Those are some of the specifics that the Minister has dealt with, Mr. Chairman, but what I am interested in is the policy that the Mi nister has towards parks.

While I was Minister responsible for parks, one of the things that I was pleased to be able to do in that period of time was present a public statement as to how the government would manage the parks and towards what ends the government would manage the parks so that the public, whether they agreed with or not, at least had a statement as to the objectives that the government was trying to attain and how they in general would go about the attainment of those objectives.

To the best of my knowledge, there remains then a statement of policy on the books within the Department of Natural Resources, unless the Minister has either repealed that policy or altered it. So the question for the Min ister would be, has he repealed or altered the statement of Parks Policy that was in place when he assumed responsibility for the department? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, the answer to that is no, there has been no revocation of existing policy statements - and I confess that I haven't perused the policy statements that the honourable member refers to - but what we have done, and I apologize for not indicating that at the outset, what we had done is we have commissioned within the department a review of our parks, to look at all of our parks from the point of view of developing an overall parks system, to confirm the kind of activities that we think approp riate and the appr opriate classification for various parks. Mr.

Chairman, the fact is that today some of our parks are categorized in a manner which really we don't consider is appropria te. For example, the Grand Beach Park is classified as a natural park, and obviously from the point of view of anyone that has been at Grand Beach would recognize that it's an intensively used recreational park, rather than a natural park. I would assume that most people would find that. So it is, Mr. Chairman, that we are within House, I don't know whether we have enga ged anyone outside to do this.

We have some outside assistance to look at all of our parks to recommend a parks system plan which would include classification and orientation in respect to use. MR. B. RANSOM: I am pleased to hear that, Mr. Chairman. I gather then that follows from point 2.(

b) of the Parks Policy which called for a developing of parkland classification system which will reflect the principle purpose of the parkland and which can be readily understood and identified with by the public. That was something then that was called for in the Parks Policy and is being pursued by the Minister. HON. A. MACKLING: If that was the point, yes, certainly that is in keeping with our thinking. MR. B. RANSOM: I recommend the policy to the Minister, Mr. Chairman. He should look at it.

He should read it and see whether or not he concurs with it because I am sure that is the only public statement of policy I would expect that staff are likely even continuing to follow that policy unless the Minister sees fit to change it. I think it was carefully thought out and I think it would reflect the best interests of users of parks in Manitoba and if it doesn't in the Minister's view then I think he should change it in a public way and say which of the pieces of that policy he doesn't agree with then. Just a question on the planning.

There were a number of prin cipl es tha t were to be conside red in the 2359

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 preparation of master plans. The master planning, of course, was part of the policy as well and if I could just read to the Minister some of that maybe he can give me an indication of whether he concurred or not. It said, the following principles will be considered in the preparation of master plans: (

a) General parklands will provide where possible and feasible a variety and amounts of recreation desired by the majority of the users. It goes on, parklands shall produce high quality recreational opportuni ties and there's a definition of "quality" there.

All forms of outdoor recreation are recognized as legitimate and may be provided for in or on suitably designated areas of provincial parkland, consumptive uses, for example, hunting and fishing are as legitima te as no n-consum ptiv e uses in thos e parklands suitably designated, and emphasis should be placed on deter mining ways and means to commercially utilize natural resources that are not presently req uir ed for the provision of ou tdoor recreation opportunities which will not lessen the future recreational experience, and it goes on in some detail. There are really four principles involved there: 1.

That there be recognition given to the numbers of people who desire a certain type of recreational use; 2. That considerable attention be paid to the quality of the recreat ional experience that's being made available; 3. That consumptive uses of resou rces such as hunting and fishing are legitimate within designated areas of parks; 4. That the commercial utilization of natural resources would also be legitimate providing that it did not lessen the future opportunity for recreational experience.

Perhaps the Mi nister could give an indication then whether those four princip les are still being pursued in the development of the master planning which is now under way? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I confess that it's been some many weeks or months since staff did review the overall park policy objectives with me and they don't come readily to mind. However, I do recall that the department has briefed me on the broad policy guidelines. I have no problem with the broad policy aspects. I think we have looked at some fine-tuning of some of the policy matters.

In some areas I think we have to recog nize tha t maybe the balance of consumptive as against non-consumptive recreation has to change. I point out that in some parks, for example, I'v e already indicated the Beaudry, this would be primarily a consumptive park if you consider recreation to be highl y consum ptive. It's consump tive of its intensive use, it will involve both commercial and natural use. When I talk about it that way I mean there is a high-people involvement in the use of a park like Birds Hill or Beaudry. I don't believe there will be any major change in those broad policy statements.

Ho wever, when we look at the study that has been made it may well be that we will want to have a further review of those principles. MR. B. RANSOM: The Mi nister indicated that there might have to be a shift away from consumptive uses towards non-consumptive uses. Is the Minister making that statement on the basis of some value judgment or is he making that statement on the basis of some quantitative information? HON. A. MACKLING: No, Mr. Chairman, I'm just making that in anticipation that certainly when we have that study then we may well want to vary somewhat the policy statements that I made before.

I really don't know. I would hesitate to say, oh yes, there'll be no change. For example, I know that in our consideration of Hecia Park at the present time we're looking at some variations in the consumptive use there so it will depend upon the study's finding and then an analysis of what we anticipate for each of the categorized park systems. MR. B. RANSOM: What sort of changes is the Minister considering with respect to Hecia Island, for instance? HON. A.

MACKUNG: Well, at the present time as the honourable members know up until this year, at least, we have a hunting capacity throughout Hecia Island and that is a moose hunting recreation. We are looking at some changes there in establishing a wildlife refuge on Hecia in part of the island to protect the herd of moose that is there so there will be consideration for changes in consumptive use if you categorize hunting and fishing as consumptive. Some consideration of other uses of park facilities where there is such an intensive use you can derogate from the natural habitat.

For example, we know that the park system has had established roots for travel for hunting. We'll want to look carefully at the established roots and the use made of them in many of our parks. MR. B. RANSOM: The Minister makes special reference to prote ct ing the mo ose on He cia Isla nd. What indication does he have there that the moose population needs protect ion? Are they under some stressful situation at the moment? HON. A. MA CKLING: Mr . Chairman, I wou ldn't characterize the situation as one where the moose population on Hecia Island is under stress.

We are concerned that on Hecia Island we have an opportunity to look at moose as a species of wildlife in a very limited habitat and environment. It gives us a unique opportunity to develop opportunities for viewing on the part of tourists and residents. It's an important resource from a recreational point of view in more ways than merely hunting, so we're concerned to establish a way of capitalizing on that resource which would include providing a protected area where moose could likely be seen by tourists throughout the year. MR. B.

RANSOM: The Mini ster's tal king about establishing a portion of the park for that purpose, the purpose being then to build up a maximum number of moose in order that people are able to see them more frequen tly, as opposed to protect the herd of moose, which was the term that he used earlier. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, if the park is open to hunting, I admit it opens the park to hunting by Native people as well, and Native hunting can, although it hasn't threatened the moose population, there has 2360

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 been a fair number of animals killed as a result of domestic hunting.

We are concerned, not with the reduction in numbers as a result of that, but we do have a unique opportun ity to ensure the protection of a herd there into the future for, not only hunting as I've indicated, but for other recreational use; the people who like to see wildlife and in the area on Hecia that we are contemplating establishing the refuge, we have a number of natural inducements for the moose, natural salt licks and excellent moose habitat so that the chances of tourists seeing the moose will be much greater than probably anywhere else in a park in Manitoba. MR. B.

RANSOM: But the Minister has no di fficulty with the concept then of consumptive use of fish and wildl ife in parks, prov idin g it doesn't prevent the attainment of other recreational objectives as well? HON. A. MACKLING: That's right. MR. B. RANSOM: What about the developments east of Lake Winnipeg? Is there any thrust at the moment having to do with the parks there? For years there has been discussion about the possib ility of a national park or a park in co-operation with Ontario or the province itself. Are there any new developments in that area? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Mr .

Chairman, I have signalled to staff of the department my interest in seeing the area east of Lake Winnipeg, the area north of Nopiming, an area that encompa sses the Bloodvein and Popla r Rivers I belie ve, the Leyond River to be considered for development of a wilderness park area. I know in the past there was interest on the part of the Federal Government in the development of a park, a national park in that area. Those interests apparently have no t be en pur sued .

I know tha t pr evious administrations have looked upon the unique character of that area from the point of view of development of a wilderness park area. I certainly share the interest that has gone be fore in connection with that area. We have an area that is relatively unspoiled, very few developments of any kind in it other than the Abitibi timber operation, very few mineral deposits are under active conside ration, so th ere does exis t a very significant potential for a wilderness park and I have asked staff to develop some proposals in connection with that. MR. B.

RANSOM: Is the Mi nister speaking about an area that extends all the way from Nopiming north to the Leyond River, or is he talking about taking in specific rivers on the way up the east side of Lake Winnipeg? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, there are various alternative proposals that Parks staff have in mind, proposals which would involve impinging to a greater or lesser extent on other acti viti es in the area, particularly the timber operation. MR. B.

RANSOM: Depending on what nature, what size of a park the Minister is looking at, if he's talking about going all the way up and taking in the Bloodvein River and Berens River and the Pigeon River, the Poplar River, he is going to take in an awful lot of country. What sort of discussions has the Minister had with other interests to this point? Which of the communities in the area has he had discussion with? Has he talked to Ab itibi, has he talked to Channel Area Loggers?

Has there even been extensive consultation within his own department, with the other departments that have responsibility in the area of foresty, minerals and wildlife, etc.? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, the other night when we were talking about a water development, Mr. Weber was here and we were wrest ling with the appropriate words, a pre-feasibility terminology was used in connection with the Assinibo ine-Hespeler proposed irrigation project. We're at a stage where we're merely looking at the feasi bil ity of tak ing something further.

I guess I could characterize the initiatives thus far that I have signalled to staff in the Parks Branch, in that category, an internal look at what might be considered possible before we signal that we would want to take any specifics, any proposals elsewhere to others to discuss. So, I am indicating merely that there is a look at the pre-feasibility of a wilderness park area in the general area that I talked about. MR. B.

RANSOM: This is strictly being done then by the Parks Branch, and it doesn't involve the resource allocation unit for instance in the Department of Natural Resources, or it doesn't involve the forestry, or lands, or fish, or wildlife, or the provincial land-use committee of Ca bi net and those sorts of things? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, it will involve an integrated approach from a departmental position as to the pre-feasibility of such a park. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to ask one or two questions.

I get a little apprehensive asking them when I see the Mi nister's Legislative Assistant running up giving him information because he'll be in more trouble than he can expect if he listens to too much of his advice. HON. A. MACKLING: It's good advice. MR. D. BLAKE: Just before I question the Minister, in my area I can encourage him to maintain the moose herd on Hecia Island because if he doesn't outlaw nightlighting he may require that herd for a basic herd to replenish the moose supply in the rest of the province. Mr.

Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister what the plans are for Lake Wahtopanah, the Rivers area provincial park for the coming year? HON. A. MACKLING: I have to find out whether we're draining it or what we're doing with it. Just a minute. MR. D. BLAKE: Just get the algae the hell out of it and it will be a great place, I'll tell you. HON. A. MACKLING: Just a minute, I'l l find out, Dave. 2361

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 MR. D. BLAKE: Stop Minnedosa from dumping their sewage in it. A MEMBER: Order, order, order. HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, let's have some order here, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. MR. D. BLAKE: I am waiting for an answer, Mr. Chairman. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I am given to understand at the Rivers Recreational Park, we established a sewage lagoon last year. That should improve the water quality, I guess, if there was any runoff, any outdoor places. MR. D. BLAKE: No, that's not the problem. HON. A. MACKLING: We are installing showers this year. We believe in people being clean.

MR. D. BLAKE: A few years back, Mr. Chairman, there were a number of locations down close to the lake that I know were originally set up for overnight camping, but that park is not overly popula ted on overnight camping. There was a lot of people from the Brandon area not too many miles away that took permanent sites in there. A few years back they moved them all up on a hill above the lake where there wasn't a tree or a stick for shade, consequently they lost 30 or 40 permanent summer trailer sites there.

I understand last year a number of them were allowed to go back down to the sites that they had been able to book previously. I wonder what the situation was there now? HON. A. MACKLING: I am given to understand that we are going to continue the practices that were emplo yed in 1982. Presumably then those who were unable to park or camp closer to the waterfront will be able to do so this year. MR. D. BLAKE: They will be able to do so this year? HON. A. MACKLING: Same policy as was utilized in 1982. MR. D.

BLAKE: I wonder could the Minister give me any indication of what is being done this year in the way of stocking the lake with fish species. HON. A. MACKLING: I am advised that will fall under the Fisheries section, but maybe I can get an answer here. - (Interjection) - We'll come back to that one, Dave. MR. D. BLAKE: That's fine. HON. A. MACKLING: You don't want the answer now? MR. D. BLAKE: No hurry for it. As long as they put lots of fish in there, Mr. Chairman, because those of us that are competent fisherman are lugging them out of there in fairly good numbers. We'd hate to see it depleted. HON. A.

MACKLING: Not over your limit, Dave. MR. D. BLAKE: It has become a reasonably popular lake for fishing, in spite of the condition that the water gets into. It's amazing the quality of the fish that come out of there in spite of the fact you can't see them in the green algae late in the year. It has also become a pretty popular waterfowling area. There are more geese nesting in that area, more geese staging there in the fall and it's becoming a very very popular waterfowling spot as well.

I think with some care and proper water levels being maintained there, that the lake can become a pretty popular resort area in an area that's a little bit deprived for recreational spots even though we live in the parkland of Manitoba. On roadside parks, Mr. Chairman, to the Minister, Manitoba of course takes second place to a lot of areas in our province for roadside parks or rest areas, whatever they may be. I know we're on the general park area.

At one time there was a roadside park planned on Highway No. 10 on the by-pass around Min nedosa on the hill to the north of town - and the by-pass is across the river going up the hill - and there was a great objection to it. The Hig hways Branch would say you can't make a cutoff on a curve or on a hill. Someone who I speak to quite frequently that was a Minister of Highw ays at the time that by-pass came in tells me that it was designed specifically to have the cutoff there.

There is an observation point on that hill going up on the highway to the north of Minnedosa and there's an ideal spot there for a roadside park or an overnight park that would look back over the valley on that beautiful Town of Minnedosa and would just be an ideal spot for an overnight camp spot. I just wondered if there had been anything further done on it, or if the Parks Branch had anything in their plans for developing that roadside or overnight park spot. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not familiar with it and I'd have to dis cuss the potential there with the department.

However, as a general policy we try to look at the adequacy, the distance of travel between major points and the accessibility of facilities at a wayside park, rest stops and that sort of thing. Certainly I'd want to consider the area there, but we don't like to spread ourselves too thin. We do have 102 provincial wayside parks. I know this is an area where we're always looking at points where maybe we could consider one.

I know that - let's see it's off High way No. 7 - I've looked at an area and suggested the department look at that for a wayside park because there's a long stretch between Winnipeg and Arborg and no wayside park. But we do look at those things. MR. D. BLAKE: Yes, I'm happy to hear that, Mr. Chairman, but High way No. 7 is not really going to help the people travelling High way 10 that much. HON. A. MACKLING: No, I know. 2362

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 MR. D. BLAKE: I would certainly recommend as one of the beauty spots in Manitoba, I would certainly recommend that be looked at and seeing as this is Minnedosa and the rural municipalities around that area, this is their Centennial year. There would be nothing that would endear this government to the hearts of those people more than to announce the development of that roadside park at this particular time. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I'm delighted to learn of the Minnedosa Centennial, and of course that brings to mind the point that we endeavour where we can as a government, to facilitate local government in establishing facilities in an area too and certainly it would be open to the RM. or if it's the town, to initiate some thing. Perhaps either through hig hways or ourselves might have some input to offer. Now while I have the floor for a moment, Mr.

Chairman, I'm advised that staff are not in a position to give the Fisheries answer tonight, or perhaps we could give it later if we reach it, but we don't have the information available right now. MR. D. BLAKE: Well that's fine, Mr. Chairman, we can do that under Fisheries. I hope that I'm still here when we get to the Fisheries, then we can go under it there. Mr. Chairman, I know there was a program announced recently. As you know my constituency encompasses Riding Mo untain Na tio nal Park. Ther e are great problems encountered there with the wildlife in Riding Mountain National Park.

I understand there's a great amount of land that's been purchased by the Provincial Government. There has been some compensation or funds available to those that are available to trap beaver, to control the beaver population, that causes the problems without that national park. Unfortuna tely the beaver can't distinguish whether they're in federal territory or whether they're in provincial territory and possibly the Minister could bring us up-to-date on that particular pont of it. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I appreciate the honourable member's concerns, although it might be more appropria te to deal with that under the Wildlife lines. I think I can indicate that (I nterjection) - No. I think I can indicate to the honourable member that (Interjection) - MR. J. DOWNEY: I'm just looking for a short answer, Mr. Chairman. HON. A. MACKLING: Right. That there is a liaison committee that has been established. They have given advice and assistance in respect to development of policy and program. We have an agreement with the Federal Government in connection with a trapping program in respect to beavers.

It's cost-shared and it's been working out very well. MR. D. BLAKE: Yes just a final question, Mr. Chairman. The actual Rivers Lake itself has become an extremely popular recreat ion area for weekend visitor s and weekend people that stay there for one and two weeks, and some for longer periods. The local parks committee has enjoyed government grants over the years in putting in shower facilities and developing additional camping facilities.

I just want to encourage the Minister, when he gets requests from the area there for a further development to look favourably on it, because it has become a very very popular spot. We have an excellent 9 hole golf course and the Clear Lake golf course is becoming overcrowded. We're looking for visitors by the score in our 100th anniversary year this year and we welcome the Minister and any members of the caucus that he'd care to bring with him.

I'm sure we could develop a foursome to take on any and all comers and show them our beautiful lake, our golf course and park facilities when he - (I nterjection) - enjoys Minnedosa. HON. A. MACKLING: Be happy to play with you, Dave. I'll even beat one of the those orange balls that Frank wants to talk about or wants to hit. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, dealing with Parks, I wonder if the Min ister could tell the committee whether or not there's any plans by his department to open some new cottage lot sites in the Whiteshell. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I'd earlier indicated in answer to I think a question from the Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain that the decision in respect to that was, that given the thrust of the master planning in the Whiteshell and the proposals in respect to intensive use areas, that it was not our inter.tion to open new Crown lands for cottage lot development in the Whiteshell. MR. R. BANMAN: Is the Minister's department allowing people who have homesteaded lands and have lands within the bounda rie s of the Wh iteshell Park to subdivide those properties and sell them? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, any cottage lot development, any residual cottage lot development would have to comply with the zoning that is provided for in the master plan and cottage lot development pursuant to the zoning, is only possible in the intensive areas and in the intensive areas to the extent that we're advised there is residual capacity in the lakes or in the lands to accept further cottaging. MR. R. BANMAN: Would it be fair to say that there is a total freeze on any development in the Whiteshell Park? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr . Chairman, I wouldn 't characterize it as a total freeze.

I think there is some residual but it is a very limited one. MR. R. BANMAN: In other words, there is a total freeze on and I think the Minister would, upon closer scrutiny of it and upon looking at the policies of the department, say that there's a total freeze on the Whiteshell. Having established that, I wonder if the Minister could tell us what time frame he is contemplating for the implementation of the Nopiming Park. 2363

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 HON. A. MACKLING: I didn't hear the last question, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Will the Member for La Verendrye repeat please? MR. R. BANMAN: Could the Min ister inf orm the committee what time frame he is looking at to implement the creation of Nopiming Park? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, Nopiming Park has been established for some time. Let me go back to indicate to the honourable member that he continues to insist that what I have indicated is a total freeze on any cottage development in Whiteshell.

I've indicated that pursuant to the master planning any development is open only in accordance with zoning and that would be in intensive areas and to the extent that there is any residual capacity in intensive areas. One of the provisions is that there would be no further subdivisions. But if someone owned a parcel of land in an intensive area, I believe - and I think I'm correct here - that they would be enabled to put up a cottage. MR. R. BANMAN: Let me pursue that for just a minute.

Is the Min ister saying tha t someone who has homesteaded a property in the Whiteshell and now wishes another member of his or her family to build a cottage, or let's say a home on that particular site, not necessarily a cottage lot site, that the Minister would okay that type of a transaction within a family or within the community such as, let's say the Seven Sisters area where there are certain people that have homesteaded prop erties, and now wish to build a permanent residence but currently, I understand, are not able to? HON. A. MACKLING: No, Mr.

Chairman, citizens of Manitoba or elsewhere are not encouraged nor are they permitted, under the present policy, to build permanent homes in parks. MR. R. BANMAN: Even though, Mr. Chairman, many of them have homesteaded that property and have title to that property? HON. A. MA CKLING: Mr.

Chairman, if they have homesteaded the pro perty and are still resident in a home on the pro perty, I nor anyone else up to this point in time, including the previous administration, has evicted people from park proper ty, but we are carrying on the policy that existed in discouraging people, by way of pol icy, from establishing permanent residence in parks. MR. R. BANMAN: So the freeze is on for anybody who wants to establish permanent residency in the parks. HON. A. MACKLING: All right, I'll go along with that. MR. R.

BANMAN: I would like to ask the Mi nister - he has floated a plan before the people of Manitoba dealing with the creation of a wilderness area in the Whiteshell - what kind of time frame is he looking at implementing that particular policy or plan that he has before him? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I have no particular time frame as yet under consideration because as I indicated to the questions put to me by members earlier, I have indicated that we're at an in-House preliminary revue stage and I have no time frame. MR. R.

BANMAN: What kind of assurance can the Minister give the people who own businesses, in other words, camps in that area, people who - (Interjection) HON. A. MACKLING: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, I want to correct something. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, and I apologize to the honourable member for interrupting him, but I was under the impression that he was talking about a time frame for the development of a proposed wilderness park. Yes, well there's some indication down here the

interpretation was of the wi lderne ss zone in the Whiteshell Park. Is that what your question was about? MR. R. BANMAN: That's right. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I want to correct that then because I misunderstood what the honourable member was talking about. In respect to the zoning in the Whiteshell master plan, all of that zoning hopefully will be confirmed in a relatively short time. We've had the master plan process ongoing for some time.

It had been under the previous Minister and I'm hopeful that in the relatively near future, that is sometime this year certainly, that master plan process can be confirmed which would include designated zoning pursuant to the proposals in the master plan. MR. R.

BANMAN: Just to ensure that the Minister and I are on the same wave length, is he saying that the government will deal with the matter of the wilderness park area, i.e. the particular stretch of the Wh iteshell Park which will include a number of smaller lakes, Saddle Lake and a number of others, where they will be excluding any use of any power vehicles, or will not allow any trapping, or the taking of any timber, is that the policy that he's referring to? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I can't agree with the generality of the question which includes a number of observations.

The master plan proposals do include provision for a proposed wilderness zone comprising an area approxima tely 12 percent of the area of Whiteshell, encompassing a number of lakes. The propo sal does include, as I understand it at the present time, a continuation of the one trapline that is in the area. The proposals do include an elimina tion of motorized vehicles or instruments of any kind. Certainly all of that is under consideration as a result of the master plan proposal and all of that will be determined in the very near future.

Some aspects of the master planning may require some legislation or some alteration and so it might extend over a longer period, but I'm hopeful that relatively soon, and by that I mean in the next several months, we will be in a position to confirm the policy positions in respect to the Whiteshell plan. MR. R. BANMAN: Can the Mini ster inform the committee as to whether or not an area such as 2364

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 Crowduck Lake will be involved in the ban of use of motorized vehicles, units, airplanes, trapping and that type of thing? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I don't have the Whiteshell zoning map with me but as I recall it, and it's confirmed by staff, the Crowduck Lake area will be an area identified as a back country zone where -consumptive uses including hunting, fishing, would be permissible, including the use of snowmobiles, aircraft, motor boats and so on. MR. R.

BANMAN: The Minister was asked by the Member for Turtle Mountain with regard to the possible establishment of a wilderness area on the east shore of Lake Winnipeg from Manigotagan running North into the Bloodvein area. Has there been any consultation in the last year between the department and the Federal Parks Department with regard to the establishment of this park? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I understand from staff there has been no consultation, apparently the Federal Government has shown no further interest in this development. MR. B. BANMAN: Mr.

Chairman, that's the most encouraging thing we've heard all night. I think that from what we've seen happen at the Riding Mou ntain and other parks that are under federal jurisdiction I don't think that Manitoba or any other province will want to give up any jurisdiction within their area to the Federal Government because you lose total control of your resource in doing so.

I wonder if the Minister - he has increased the, and is in the process of increasing cottage lot fees, I wonder if he has within that policy determined what he is going to do with the permanent residents that live in an area such as the Member for The Pas' area just outside of The Pas at Clearwater Lake? HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, that problem has existed for sometime it's (Interjection) - Mr.

Chairman, I'll pass on the humour evidenced by the Honour able Member for Arthur but it seems to be characteristic of this department that some problems are of long standing and I can app reciate that they are because they have very difficult matters that embroil them but we have been looking at the question of permanent residences in parks. We have some areas that have much more of this than others and certainly the member is correct that in the Clearwater Park on Clearwater Lake we have a number of permanent residents.

We are studying that matter intensively and we hope to be bringing forward some proposals to my colleagues in government to address those problems but I'm not in a position to give any specifics of the proposals at this time. MR. B. BANMAN: Are any of the funds that will be collected now, some of these people will be paying $500 a year in these parks, are any of those funds earmarked to help municipalities out for some of the services they are providing in the parks? HON. A. MACKLING: No, Mr. Chairman. I do point out that municipalities are not obligated and do not provide the municipal services in the parks.

The question of school tax is another matter and that, of course, is tied in with the whole problem of addressing the obligations of people who live in parks on a permanent basis. MR. B. BANMAN: I don't want to get into an argument with the Minister, I'm sure the Member for The Pas would because his council in The Pas is the one that is worried about the recreation facilities that they're using, about the garbage dump that they're using, and all these other things that the people in the park are using, so I won't get into that right now.

But I don't accept the Mini ster's remarks that the y are not providing services because they are and in many instances the parks people are providing very few services, really it's the surrounding communities that are. Ho wever, having said that, Mr. Chairman, is there any way that the government will be allowing or will be dealing with additional cottage lots being opened up in the Falcon Lake, West Hawk, southern part of the Whiteshell area at all? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, first of all to go back to The Pas for a moment, I can assure the Honour able Member for La Ve rend rye that the Honour able Member for The Pas has spent some time with me indicating his concerns on behalf of the muni cipa lit y in con nection with the probl em of permanent residents there and he has been a driving force in ensuring that this matter will no longer rest for many many years without any resolution. We will look at the problem and try to come up with some answer to it and he is in no small way the reason for our initiative.

I want to indicate that in respect to our Vacation Horne Lot Allocation Program in 1983 we have arranged for lots on parkland and Crown lands to be allocated by a public draw in May and June of this year and if you like, Mr. Chairman, I could just highlight those. In the Interlake region at Black's Point there are 8 lots that are up for draw and a further 29 lots at Little Grindstone Point; at Leaside Beach, 7 lots. In the eastern region, Beresford Lake, 3 lots; Longlake, 2 lots; they're iso lated lots. Gronsdin Point 32 lots; northeastern region Eden and Birch Lakes, 43 lots; Paint Lake, 17 lots all told.

Nort hwestern region, Wekusko Lake, 21 lots; Schist Lake, 19 lots. Western region, North Steep Rock Lake, 8 lots; Wellman Lake, 31 lots; Lake of the Prairies, 63 lots. Southwestern region Macs Lake, that's Arbor Island, 3 lots; George Lake, 37 lots. MR. B. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I just have to say to the Minister and I guess it's the dilemma that every Minister of Parks faces. We have a certain segment in society which says we never want to emulate or do what we did at Falcon Lake with regard to building up a particular area because it's much too commercialized.

When you look throughout the whole province and see where the values area, where people want to go it's Falcon Lake and there is a very small segment in society that want the true wild erness concept. A lot of people in this world feel that roughing it is watching black and white T.V. That's a fact. I would 2365

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 say that 90 percent of the people that live in Winnipeg want to have access to a lake nearby which has a good road system. I want to say to the Mi nister that, I think, one of the biggest problems and we've all let it happen to us by the conservation types, by the people who feel that everybody is into flora and fauna. I think there are a lot of people that would like to have their own little 60 x 80 - (Interjection) - Well the Member for lnkster will know what I'm talking about because I'm sure he's up on this.

One of the glowing problems with this whole thing is that the Minister just read off the new cottage lots that we're having in this province and they're not where people want to go, they're not in the Whiteshell. I want to say to the Mi nister that I know it's not an easy thing to tackle and I know he's going to have a lot of heat put on him by the Naturalist Society, by his Legislative Assistant who will fight him tooth and nail every time he tries to (I nterjection) - Mr. Chairman, we see it right he's giving him bad advice again. I want to say to the Minister he has my support.

I see nothing wrong with another 100 cottage lots being opened in a townsite north of the Trans-Canada Hig hway at Falcon Lake. I see nothing wrong with that as long as the proper infrastructure is put in to make sure that the effluent and things like that are looked after, that there is not an environmental problem.

But to curtail the number of lots that we can have in the Whiteshell when the infrastructure is ready, the roads are there, the shopping centre is there, the golf course is there, the permanent residents are there from the Inter-City Gas, to go the other way and now establish another area where you're not even going to allow any motorboats into just so that a few handful of people can enjoy themselves over there at the expense of 95 percent of the other population, is wrong. If the Member for lnkster wants to go canoeing, my goodness, he can go up to Berens River.

The member over here for Ruperstland knows where the wilderness is. There are some lovely canoe routes over there, but don't deprive the average person in Winnipeg, who has so few amenities of life in the summertime here, from owning something in the Wh iteshell Park. I want to say to the Minister I will support any move that he makes that will in an orde rly fa shion secure th at the environment is not hampered, open some of the cottage lots in West Hawk, Falcon Lake, all the way up into Brereton Lake and that area.

There are a lot of areas that can be developed; there are a lot of people that would like to build their little cottage on a small piece of pro perty. The infrastructure is there and I would urge the Min ister, instead of trying to freeze out more people out of the Whiteshell which really the master plan will do, to go the other way, provide some amenities of life for the people in Manitoba so that they want to stay here, that they want to work here and that they can enjoy a few of the things in society here, in Manitoba, that many of us have come to know and enjoy.

Let not a handful of people who feel that they want to preserve everything, for who knows what, Mr. Chairman. I don't know, the Member for lnkster just never ceases to amaze me. You know, he has the typical parks' philosophy. If we didn't have any people in the parks, we wouldn't have a problem with people messing them up. People cause problems in parks. If you keep the people out, then we wouldn't have any problems in the parks. Well, Mr.

Speaker, I happen to believe that the parks are for people, and to set aside another chunk of the Whiteshell where you can't go in with a motorboat, where you can't drive in with a skidoo, where you can't land your light aircraft, is absolutely ridiculous because it's not only going to hurt the average constituent in Winnipeg here, it's also going to have a severe effect on the camp operators in that area. I'd like to ask the Minister one question. With the establishment of this park now that's he's talking about, where he's virtually frozen out everything except the Member for lnkster - and Mr.

Chairman, I have to say to the Mi nister and he knows this - there are some people that have bought small camps in there, want to fix up these camps and want to put some capital money into this. I'm wondering, with this particular thing that's happening right now, will the Minister provide some compensation to the camp owners for the loss of business that they will incur because of establishment of this particular park? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I hesitate to try and respond at any length to the honourable member's dissertation.

I appreciate and respect the views of all members in respect to how we should order things in society, and each of us has a right to express his views fully and I will respect those views. Ho wever, there's no qu estion but that in the devel opme nt of the Whiteshell master plan, there has been a growing consensus of viewpoint acknowledging that most of the area of the Whiteshell has been the subject of intensive development. The honourable member refers to Falcon Lake park staff, and I think people at Falcon Lake will confirm that there is very substantial usage of that lake.

It's considered that there ought to be no further cottaging development there because the capacity is already used. To suggest that it's just an open end and we can continue to develop, without limit, does not accord with reasonable consumption of the park and reasonable use of the park. I have not, or my government, established Whiteshell Park; it's been there for a long time. It's true that there are different arguments about how the park can be best used. I have literally received hundr eds and hundreds of letters to which I've responded.

I confess that I haven't drafted each letter, but I've read them, signed them. A lot of them have been very thoughtful, very concerned letters about different issues in respect to usage of areas in Whiteshell Park, but a great many of them recognize that it is possible and logical to zone use within parks so that we can get a broad spectrum of use within a park. We can go from intensive use to really non-use, leaving things in a natural state, that both of those - if you can call them extremes - are possible in good zoning and I think we have to look at that.

We have to recognize that there is a broad spectrum of use that has to be recognized and I want to say here at this public forum, if the Honour able Member for lnkster will permit me, that the Honourable Member for lnkster has been maligned by others as suggesting that he has used inordinate influence, he has been the voice of the naturalist, he has been a steady, consistent voice, 2366

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 with me at least, indicating that we must look at compromises, we must look at individual use in various sections and that it is possible, within Parks, to have that broad spectrum of use that I've been talking about. To suggest that somehow he is an extremist in some ways, I think, is improper. - (Interjection) - Well, I have indicated your objection. So, Mr. Chairman, I really have to reject the general thrust of the Honourable Member for La Verendrye that the Whiteshell is an open door, and we can continue to develop without limit. MR. R. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker, there are two vested interest groups that deal with any further development in the Whiteshell, and the Minister will recognize that and everybody does. No. 1, the people, such as the Member for lnkster who don't want to see any more development and the one who would rather turn back the clock than move ahead, and the other vested interest group is the current cottage owners, if you're going to ask them they won't want any more cottage development either. But where does it leave all these hundreds and thousands of people that might some day aspire to having a cottage lot in the Whiteshell?

I want to say to the Minister that is the problem that he faces. I just want to ask a final question. Will there be any compensation when the Minister announces his plan in the fall? He's indicated maybe in the fall he's going to pass the master plan. Will there be any compensation to camp operators in the area of the proposed new wilderness area? Will there be any compensation to these people? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I'm not aware that any rights will be expropria ted from anyone in the establishment if the wilderness area, as proposed, is established.

If that were that case, then I think we'd be constrained to look at compensation. I don't think that the planning, as is proposed, works to that effect . MR. R.

BANMAN: Would the Minister say that someone who is renting boats that go into that area, someone that has rented out cottages with the people that are renting those cottages, that are going out fishing in that particular area with motorized vehicles and are using that area that's now going to be designated a wilderness area, that those people that are deriving their major income from that wilderness area which now will be virtually closed off to them would have a legal or a legitima te claim on gettin g some compensation when the Minister passes this Wilderness Act? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, for the edification of the honourable member, the propo sed area, the Mantario Lake area, does not have any permanent cottages in it. There is one cottage that was developed some years ago that's presently supervised by the Manitoba Naturalist Society; other than that there are no cottages in that area. There are some who have fished in that area; some who have snowmobiled in that area; and there are others who have flown tourists to fish in that area but, other than that, there is no intensive development in the area. MR. R.

BANMAN: I just want to point out to the Minister , and I hope he will listen to these people once that happens, that there are people that derive their income and a proportion of their income from that particular area, and they will be affected should this particular thing pass, as he has indicated it will. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of questions dealing with the parks in the Provincial Expenditures dealing with parks.

I want to say I think the people of the eastern region of the province, the City of Winnipeg, are fairly fortunate to have the kind of problems they have with the amount of water and the amount of recreation facilities that are available to them with the Whiteshell and the water lying east of them. Dealing with the region on the western part of the province, one which I represent, there's been a continual request from the Municipality of Winchester and the Town of Deloraine dealing with a very very small

section of land that is a municipal road allowance at Lake Metigoshe where, in fact, it is the only public beach on that lake. It is an area where public swimming lessons are held each year, and I'm sure if a health inspector went in there when they're being taken, that they would be shut down because of the water problems, the algae and the lack of a nice beach. There has been a request - I'm sure the former Mi nister of Natural Resources, first of all, built a road into that lake and I want to give him credit for it.

There are signs and there are a lot of people in the southwest area, not only in Manitoba, but Saskatchewan and the United States, Brandon as well, uses the Lake Metigoshe area. It's a well-advertised lake facility. There is no public beach, Mr. Chairman, there is a capability of having one. The local communities, both the Town of Deloraine and the RM of Winchester have continually requested that the province take over a certain piece of ground that could be maintained as a public beach and be a credit to the province and to that lake.

However, there has continually been a rejection by the Parks Branch and the parks people in getting involved because they say that there is one adjacent to it at Lake Max. Mr. Chairman, in my estimation, that's not acceptable because of the numbers of people that want to use Lake Metigoshe, as well as Lake Max.

I think, without cost ing them very much money, the whole Parks Department wouldn't even notice it in their Estimates or their Budget, if they were made responsible or worked out an agreement with the Municipality of Winchester to rehabilitate and to maintain a public beach area at Metigoshe, would be something that I think would help a lot of people, particularly when there aren't many lakes in the southwest corner.

For example, there's one at Oak Lake which is full of rocks and, as well, when they're out there maintaining it, I wish they'd haul the rocks out so the kids wouldn't get all smashed up on them at Oak Lake. Bill Henderson and the province have worked very well, but that's one lake, and the other one, of course, is Metigoshe and Lake Max in the Turtle Mountain area. I ask the Minister, again, to consider taking over a very small piece of ground that is a road allowance area from the municipality and make it into a public beach area. I just want the Minister to say, yes, and 2367

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 then I'll wait till we get to Crown Lands for further questioning. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, of course I know that the honourable member will be unhappy to hear me indicate, but I think the opportunity is available to the RM, if the potential is there to develop the beach area further.

We do assist rural municipalities in advising as to the type of development, how it can proceed, any way we can help; but to suggest that where some people deem that there is recreational potential that we must develop it because they see development potential there, is too difficult a principle for us to foll ow. There is, as staff has indicated and the honourable member recognizes, in the immediate proximity of this lake Turtle Mountain Park, and within it, Adam Lake and Max Lake where facilities are maintained by the department. MR. J. DOWNEY: That, Mr.

Chairman, is very cold comfort to the people who are living in the Lake Metigoshe area, in cottages and in camp grounds, that want to use a public beach, if they have to drive, say, 5 or 10 miles to Lake Max or Lake Adam to use the provincial beach facility. I again suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the same people that look after Lake Max and Lake Adam, in 15 minutes a day, could do the kind of work necessary to maintain the beach at Lake Metigoshe. I don't think it's too much to ask by those people; they got lots of advice, Mr.

Chairman, they're long on advice; most people are in those communities who want to develop something. What they're short of is the kind of funds that the province could put into a public beach development and the maintenance with staff who, I think, could extend themselves a little further and maintain it. It's there, the whole setup is there; all they have to do, Mr. Chairman, is co-operate a little bit and get with it. This master planning blarney that we hear from the civil servants and from all these people make me ill, to tell you the truth.

Let's get down to a little common sense and take a down-to-earth look at it and get on with the job of providing the service that the Parks Branch can do without giving us this malarkey from master planning. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I have no t ind icated anything about a master planning at Mitagoshe Lake. I understand that there are lakes and facilities within reasonable driving range and the honourable member is concerned . . . MR. J. DOWNEY: Get in your car when you go to your cottage and drive 20 miles to a lake, great fun. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I haven't had the privilege of visiting Metigoshe Lake, perhaps I will later this summer; but let me assure the honourable member that most people in Manitoba do not have a lake within five or ten miles, and they're very privileged to have a lake in a park facility developed within 40 - 50 miles of their residence. For the honourable member to insist that, because there are some people that want facilities within five or ten miles of their home, and that should be our criteria, I think we'd be in very difficult financial circumstances if we tried to adopt that as a criteria. MR. J. DOWNEY: No, Mr.

Chairman, the Minister has misread me. If you have a cottage at the lake, at least you'd like to have some lake surface. In most areas where there are public or cottage developments, there is a lake access provided by the province. They've done it at Oak Lake, there's an Oak Lake Beach; there are private cottages right in that area and the province have provided a public beach.

I'm saying the same thing could be made available at Lake Metigoshe without a nickel of Capital expenditure, but use the maintenance staff that are there to go in and put a little sand on a road allowance, clean out some of the algae and make it so that there could be swimming lessons, and in fact, those people who have cottages in that community could use the lake. Certainly I don't expect everybody to have a lake within 40 miles, but I do expect them to pay attention to a facility that is there and a little bit of maintenance time spent by the province could accommodate a lot of people with little input.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Finished. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, it is true that we maintain facilities at Adam and Max Lakes and we do maintain facilities at Oak Lake, but in all of those regions they are provincial parks; they are maintained as park areas and we've maintained beaches. We have . . . provincial parks for every little lake in Manitoba. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: I'll defer to the Honourable Member for Roblin, without giving up my position on the list. MR. W. McKENZIE: I thank the Honour able Member for Lakeside. Mr.

Chairman, out of the $12 million can you give me an idea what's going to happen at Asessippi and the Duck Mountains this year? MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, we do have some developments that I will review at both Asessippi and Duck Mountain, but I'd prefer to deal with them under the Capital item because that's where they come. MR. W. McKENZIE: Can I ask one more question, Mr. Chairman? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes. MR. W. McKENZIE: Winter use utilization, there's been a tremendous demand the last four or five years for using these parts in the wintertime.

The staffs are generally laid off and the parks closed. There was a meeting held in Roblin on the 20th, some of your staff were there, again demands from local areas wanted to come in and make use of these parks in the wintertime which, up to now, has not been the case. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman. We are anxious that Manitobans recreate in our parks both 2368

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 winter and summer where that is possible. Certainly we have hundreds of miles of snowmobile trails; we gr oom cross-countr y ski trails; there are diverse opportunit ies for recreation in our parks and certainly we want to encourage that. So far as winter recreation in all parks, of course, that does involve additiona l expense in staffing. Certainly we want to promote that and in keeping with the area, the kind of demand that's there, and the fiscal ability to look at that; certainly we would want to consider all of those opportunitie s in keeping with the conditions I have indicated. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage la Prairie. One more question from the Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. W. McKENZIE: I would ask the Minister, is he prepared to try one or the other as a pilot project. Ther e is a lo t of people in the area, a lot of Saskatchewan people who would come in and use, either one or the other, if we know that there's going to be a trial run and see how it works. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member's concerns are reasonable. I want to indicate that this winter we are considering, or we will be developing, cross-country ski trails at Asessippi. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. L. HYDE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the Minister. In your opening remarks, Mr. Minister, referred to the rebuilding of the Portage Diversion Park, and I must say that I realize possibly the original planning may have taken place when we were in government. However, my concern is that the area that was delegated to the handicapped people of the area, I think, was poorly planned. I want to bring it to your attention, Sir, and hope that in the rebuilding of this park you will take this into considera tion.

Ther e is an area, im med iately downstream from the dam, that is very rocky; it's not suitable to the people who will be using the area, the handicapped people; it's not suitable for them to be trying to even cast their lines into the river. They get their lines snagged and it's just not suitable to their requirments. Ho wever, it has been brought to my attention that there is an area, just immediately downstream, that would be far mor e suitable in reloca tion of the handicapped area. I hope, Mr.

Chairman, that you will give some consideration to this suggestion and possibly move the handicapped site - it's only a matter of a short distance downstream - where they would have the natural area to their casting abilities. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I would like to elaborate just a little bit on the Portage Spillway Wayside Park. For those members who had an opportunity to see it before we had that very unusual ice condition, and it was not typical of our experience in respect to ice conditions on the Assiniboine. It was, as I say, very different than what had been experienced.

That was a beautiful little park. I am given to understand that in the design of the park, the concern of the department was to work very closely with the handicapped people, and through their association, so they were involved in the rationale and the technique of the structure itself. In addition to that, of course, the department being a related department with fisheries, was able to get the benefit of advice as to where it was likely that handicapped people would get the best fishing, and the best fishing was immediately below the spil lway.

I know that maybe it would be less snaggy, and I happen to remember that when the honourable member and I were there at the opening, some of the handicapped people did snag their lines very quickly. But that can be overcome, I think, with perhaps regular dispositions of maybe a coarse aggregate or something in the bottom there, that could be looked at, I think; I don't think that's insurmountable. In any event, I am advised that the deck and fence have already been put back in place, so that the park is not a write-off, it will be restored. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for The Pas. The member isn't finished yet.

The Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. L. HYDE: Thank you. Well, Mr. Minister, I quite agree; we all make mistakes. I think this is one mistake that has been made, and I would like you to make this correction, if at all possible, because it is definite, in the opinion of many people who fish in that place, that there is a better site for the handicapped people to enjoy the fishing in the Assiniboine River and at the same time to please the residents of the Portage area. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, we'll look at the park, its use and the handicapped peoples' advice as to fishing.

We'll even take into consideration what the honourable member has said. I say that, quite frankly, but let me put on the record that when I - and the honourable member was there when we opened that park - I acknowledged that park was in the planning before we took office. I gave credit to the staff of the department and to the previous Minister for having proceeded with the devel op ment of such a pa rk, because I think, in principle, it is what we, not only have to do, I think we're obliged to do, to respect the needs of the handicapped people. I don't think the planning was bad.

I think we had a very unique, unusual ice condition; it apparently did damage, but the damage cannot be all that great if we've already restored the deck and the fence at this time. I don't fault the Planning. It may not be perfect, maybe we'll have to improve on it, but I don't fault the previous government and I don't fault the previous administrators and planners and the handicapped people who were associated in making final recommendations in respect to the structure. A MEMBER: I've been fishing with the Member for Portage in ideal circumstances and he can't catch fish anyway. MR. L. HYDE: Mr.

Minister, I hope I've made my point. The point that you will reconsider the - I question whether that site has been re-established to the extent that you say. I was there last Monday, before I drove 2369

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 into the city this week, I saw no action at all at that particular site. Now, I am convinced that there could be an im provement made there to better the whole situation, both for the handicapped and for the local fishermen of Portage la Prairie, the sport fishermen. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Chairman, I invite the honourable member, on his way back to Portage , to call in and have a look at the deck and the fence. It's true that the park has not been fully restored, the washroom, the trail, those things have not been . . . MR. L.

HYDE: They went down the river for heaven's sake, now is your time to improve the situation. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I'll pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for The Pas. MR. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a few comments on roadside parks and the area that I'm concerned about is along the Easterville road when you leave The Pas, there is a park about 25 miles up to No. 10, and then there's no other park until you get to Devil's Lake on No. 6 Highw ay, so it's about three hours drive where there's no service stations or no parks of any kind and on the Easterville Road, about 25 miles ... HON. A.

MACKLING: We'll fit it up right away, Harry. MR. H. HARAPIAK: . . . east of No. 10 Hig hway there's a place that's known as Oscar's Point and there used to be a cabin or a fishing lodge there at one time and, with a little bit of work, there could be a real nice wayside park established there. I'm wondering if there has been any thoughts to improving a wayside park along that Easterville Road? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised that it is not immediately proximate to the highw ay, it is a little bit off the highway, it is a very beautiful site and the staff did look at it some years ago.

Certainly we're prepared to take another look, but I rem ind the honourable member that the same conditions prevail. He says ther e isn't another wayside park for a considerable distance, that's the one factor, then; but the other factor is probable usage and our capacity to handle that from a fiscal point of view at this time. MR. H.

HARAPIAK: Another area I'd like to make a comment on is the Member for La Verendrye seems to think that the only place people want to build cottages is in Falcon Lake, and I would like to tell him that there are also people in The Pas and the northern part of the province who are as proud of their part of the world as he is of theirs, and there is a lot of demand for cottage lots in that area, too.

When the Min ister read his list of areas where cottage lots were coming available he read Chess Lake but there was no mention of Clearwater Lake or Rocky Lake and I'm wondering if they were missed off the list or are there no cottage lots coming open in those areas? HON. A. MACKLING: No, there's no plans for lots coming on in that area, Mr. Chairman. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, it would be my hope to pass this

section of the Estimates of the Department of Natural Resources. I would only want to be satisfied that (

a) there's no truth to the rumour that the name of the Wh iteshell Park is being conside red being changed to that of a New Scotland. I would like to think that the Minister takes seriously the reservations and concerns expressed by my colleague, the Member for La Verendrye. Mr. Chairman, that is a continuing conflict that parks planners have to deal with, but they also have to deal with reality. The truth of the matter is contained very much in a lot what the Member for La Verendrye had to say with respect to parks.

There is one particular area that I'd like to ask the Minister before we leave this section, and that has to do with the ARC Agreement. Mr. Chairman, we've been exposed, in Manitoba, particularly, with a series of initiatives of federal and provincial nature. We're now being exposed again, of course, from the City of Winnipeg with a similar grand design and I recall, with some enthusiasm, some of the plans for what was termed the ARC Agreement, Historic Corridor Park Development, along with other features involving the river frontage of the Red River and parts of the Assiniboine.

I would ask the Minister to perhaps comment on what is happening in that regard, whether we are still more or less simply at the stage of land acquisition, or whether or not some physical work is actually being undertaken in this area, that is, the agreement covered under the ARC Agreement.

I also ask this question, I do this, if I may, just to indicate two or three of my concerns so staff has a time to provide some of that information for the Minister; what is this government's current position with respect to Hecia Island, and the request that the government faces as, indeed, my government faced, for the right of some of the original landholders to acquire some pro perty, not necessarily their origina l but some proper ty, on Hecia Island. Is that being dealt with by this government at this time? The other final question that I have is, what is happening with the facility on Winnipeg Beach?

We have a multi-hundred-thousand-dollar facility there in the form of a fi rst-rate restaurant; it was built during the Schreyer years right on the shore at Winnipeg Beach. It regrettably has undergone a history of ups and downs and a fire, the Hono urable Member for Concordia indicates, but I'm just asking, it is a major facility, there is a need for some utilization of that facility. When I met with the townspeople of Winnipeg Beach, the Council of Winnipeg Beach, and others that was one of their major concerns that this, otherwise, fine facility has been literally unused, stood empty, for far too long.

Now, is the department, in lieu of another pending season, making any arrangements, either to man it even as it was manned as a program by go vernment with training perso nnel; Red River Community students training in the fast-food industry, or as we had tried, and I acknowledge my own failure in that regard, to find suitable lessees to make that facility work for the people who utilize the day facilities at Winnipeg Beach. So, Mr. Chairman, if the Minister can indicate to me something of what's happening in those three areas, the ARC Agreement, the position of this government 2370

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 with respect to responding to a request for private land on Hecia Island, and the Winnipeg Beach facility. HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Mr. Chairman, in that order, in respect to the ARC Agreement. This is an agreement entered into by the two governments, the Federal Government and the Provincial Government. It does inv olve develo pm ents right along the Red River, including developments within the City of Winnipeg itself.

The administration of the program itself, the agreement falls under the Min ister of Urban Affairs, however, by agreement, our Parks Branch is involved in assisting in developing sites at Lockport, Netley Creek, Breezy Point and River Road and will assume responsibility for operation of these sites after the development is com plete. I understand they have been involved in the restoration of the old St. Andrews Church, I believe, the manse and there is a bank strengthening program.

Of course, the River Road is involved and sites along the river, as I pointed out I' m familiar with some of the initiative that's been taken at Breezy Point, the confluence of Netley Creek and the Red. In respect to Hecia Island, it is true, the honourable memb er is qu ite co rrect tha t former residents, permanent residents from the island, pri marily of Icelandic ethnic background, are concerned about their having some base from which, again, they can recreate on the island and they have requested that we consider allocating some land to them.

We have quite candidly deferred those requests, pending a review of proposals emanating from the master plan itself. We thought it would be inapprop riate to start making piecemeal decisions about development in the park until we'd had a look at the results of a compr ehensive review that master planning involves. In respect to the Winnipeg Beach Towers Restaurant, as it's called, we recently had public tenders out in respect to proposals to operate the restaurant.

A successful tender has been reviewed and staff are now negotiating with the successful tender in respect to an agreement to operate the restaurant this season. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, my colleague, the Member for Pembina, has some additional questions but I want to indicate to the Minister that it would be our intention then to pass this resolution, in total, subsequent to his questions. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Pembina. MR. D. ORC HARD: Mr . Chairman, on the ARC Agreement, is development of the CN East Yards still part of the ARC Agreement? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Chairman, I am not the lead Minister in connection with that but I'll see if I can get the information. We don't have the precise information as to the results of ongoing negotiations in respect to that. MR. D. ORCHARD: Who is the lead Mi nister in the ARC negotiations then? HON. A. MACKLING: Eugene Kostyra, Minister of Urban Affairs. MR. D. ORCHARD: Under Parks Maintenance, 5.(d), is that all your summer staff involved in the maintenance and the ongoing operations of the provincial parks? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Mr. Chairman. MR. D.

ORCHA RD: Does the Min ister have any requirement or necessity for bilingual hiring in parks personnel, any number of requirements for bilingual French emp loyees so that they can communicate in French? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, only where, by virtue of the community, French is a language of extensive use, for example, the St. Malo Campground. MR. D. ORCHARD: So that, other than if the local area has a sizable French speaking community, there's never been a need demonstrated to have bilingual staff? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, I believe that's true. MR. CH AIRMAN: Wh at is the pleasur e of the committee?

The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: I just want to clarify a couple of things on the hiring of staff. Are the staff that go into the parks, the part-time staff, are they on a regular recall; in other words, the same people hired back to the same parks each year, or does the staff complement change significantly with student hiring, etc.? HON. A. MACKLING: We have people who are temporary employees working for parks. They are laid off in the fall and they're recalled and those people have been in the system for many many years that way.

We do have, in addition to that, a large number of student positions where we hire people for the parks and they are students. MR. D. ORCHARD: No w under the Sala rie s Appropriation of (d)(1) , does that increase reflect simply the incremen t in salary scales or are you hirin g additional people this year? HON. A. MACKLING: Which item is that? MR. D. ORCHARD: (d)(1) . MR. CHAIRMAN: Park Maintenance. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I'm advised that it's strictly a salary increase. MR. CHAIRMAN: (5.(a)(1) to 5.(

f) were each read and passed). The Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Just prior to passing the final resolution of some $1 2,5 76,300, let me admonish the Minister and remind him that Parks Administration, the operation 2371

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 of the parks, is one of the most visible programs that any government offers to, not only the citizens of Manitoba, but all those who come to visit us and we hope, of course, there are many. As such, and I'm very serious about this, in the maintenance, really make sure the bathrooms are clean because that is - yes, would he personally undertake to make sure of that - because ii is something that comes to the Mi nister's desk and will come to this Mi nister's desk if they aren't. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Resolution No. 120: Resolve that there be granted to Her Majesty, a sum not exceeding $12 ,576,300 for Natural Resources for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 1984-p ass. The Members are reminded that the other half of these committees are still continuing in the Chamber and if they wish they may go there, then the House will adjourn after they rise. SUPPLY - EDUCATION MR. CHAIRMAN, R Eyler: Committee, come to order.

We are considering the Estimates of the Department of Education, Item 5.(k)( 1), Canada-Manitoba Winnipeg Core Area Agreement, Training and Employment Agency - the Member for Kirkf ield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, I understand there's been an agreement with the Minister and the Member for Tuxedo that we would leave this

section until later and move onto Item No. 7. Am I correct? MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam Minister. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Item 7., Bureau of French Education, (

a) Division Admi nistration: (1 ) Salaries - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes, Mr. Chairman, does the Min ister have a statement on this section? HON. M. HEMPHILL: No, I don't think so, Mr. Chairman. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, have there been any staffing changes and, if so, could she indicate what they are? HON. M. HEMPHI LL: Reduction of one position, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(a)(1)-p ass; 7.(a)(2)-pass. The Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Under the Curriculum Development and Impl ementation, is that where we'd discuss the core French? HON. M.

HEMPHILL: Yes, you could discuss it there, Mr. Chairman. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, in last year's Estimates, when we were discussing the core French, the Minister indicated that I think we're probably realistically moving as far as we can in a given year, but indicating a commitment to get more information and to continue to support the increased demand and the program in future years. In looking at the Annual Report, there is very little touched on the core French, and I wonder if the Minister could make some comments on what is being done in that area. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Chairman, we are completing the third year of a pilot project, and the program has been going very well. A study was completed after the first year and the staff has continued to monitor the program over the subsequent years. There has been an increase in the numbers of students taking the program in each year with the original 12 participating divisions continuing to participate in the program. The student populations have in the first year, in 1980, gone from 1,300 in 198 1- 82 to 3,500, in 1982-83 to 8,700. So the pilot project was not only continued, it was significantly expanded each year.

I have been advised that I have report coming to me very soon on both the results of the three-year program and with some policy proposals that will be on my desk very shortly and I expect to be able to make a decision on in a very short time. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Has there been any increased funding? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Out of the 8,700 students in the project in 1982-83, 7,000 of those students are part of the pilot project. Numb ers of students, the ones that we sort of accepted in as the increase this year, and they are being funded at the level of $19 0 per student.

The other 1,700 students are being funded at the $50 level. I think what happened there - I think we discussed this last year - is that we allowed an increase in students each year which I think was a good thing to do. We could have actually done the pilot project, I suppose, on the original numbers and not sort of opened the door for 2,000 or 3,000 more students each year. But those numbers that we decided to increase the pilot project for were what you might call the legitimate numbers of the students participating in the pilot project through the 12 participating divisions, and they received $1 90 per student.

The other ones were students where the school divisions decided to expand the programs themselves and go beyond the numbers that were covered under the pilot project. Although the $50 looks small there in relation to the $1 90 given to those legitimate pilot project students, it is better than nothing. The decision was that if students went from the conversational French into the core French program that we would allow them to use the $50 that they would have received for the conversational French and apply it to the core.

So that school divisions that expanded did so, knowing that they had a certain number of students that were covered under the $1 90 allocation, and if they went beyond that they did that knowing that there was not that $190 allocation going to be made available for those students. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, could the Minister indicate where the extra students, or where the extra 2372

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 ��'--· schools were, or divisions, that they increased the pilot project? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Chairman, I think we might need a minute or two to get that information. She might continue with another question while staff is preparing it. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to get into the record some of the concerns that were in briefs to Dr. Nicholls when he was doing his review.

One was from the Mani toba Ho me and Sch ool Association, and they indicated that the conclusion of the pilot project - and this was the first year - was that the core French is more effect ive than our current conversational French program in developing French language competency; and that if greater linguistic confidency is a desired objective, then the core French program was successful in having met this goal.

The funding by the department being reduced from $1 90 to $50 - and this was for students that weren't in the pilot project - they felt that the incentive for many boards to implement the program, the program had been removed, and that adequate funding is essential for this program. They were of the opinion that the funds allotted to the core French program must be sufficient not only for implementation in start-up costs, but also adequate for maintenance costs, and that the core French program allows all children in the English language program to obtain a basic level of competence in the French language.

It's easy to incorporate the program into the existing English system at much less cost to the taxpayer and to deny quality French instruction to those in the English program would be a serious inequality. Funding at the departmental level is critical at this stage, as the program is still in the process of development. Then the Allard parents brought in a brief. I'm sure that the Minister is aware of the Allard situation, when the immersion issue was there, and the question for the Allard parents was not French, it was the dual track at their school.

They said thos e of us that were dissatisfied with the former, meaning conversational French and French Immersion, and willing to embrace the latter, being French Imme rsion, were encouraged by the new core French program and they then in turn made presentations to the St. James-Assiniboia School Board to implement the core French, which the division did, right across the board at an expense then to the taxpayers in St. James not getting the full funding.

While the project was consid ered a pilot, they indicated that its excellence was shown, and they were asking that the funding for the core be realistically adjusted for the necessary implementation or start-up cost as well as for maintenance costs. To do other would indicate that the pr ovincia l Department of Education is saying that meaningful French language instruction should only be given in an immersion setting and to the Allard parents this was an unacceptable fact. I'm just taking a few of these, but the Montrose Home and School Association had the same trouble with the core French.

They were very anxious to have a good core French program started, and they were satisfied with the existing conversa tiona l French from Kin dergarten to Grade 3, but are convinced that the core French program was a necessary extension of this and an alternative to total French Immersion. We believe - and this is the Mo ntrose Home and School Association - that these programs must continue to be funded. They went on to say, and I'm just giving a brief

summary of their brief, the importance of French in today's society cannot be denied, but then should French be denied to a child whose parents have not chosen French Immersion? I think this is the point, time and time again, that I want to make to the Minister. The last brief I just want to touch on is from the St. James-Assiniboia School Division.

They started to say that the evaluators from the Research Branch of the Department of Education of the core French pilot program stated, and I'll quote, "Based on the student attitude data, the core French pilot project appears to have achieved its objectives of increasing student positive attitudes towards French cultural activities and towards learning and using French; that the core French pil ot pr oject was well planned and successfu lly implemented. "On the basis of these research findings and the reception of the core French pilot program in St.

James Assiniboia, the core French program replaced the conversational program in all classes at the Grade 4 level as of September 1, 1982." They went on to ask for further funding and that the funding be im plemented. The addition al funding required by the core French program now has to be made up by the school division from the Special Levy.

The researchers of the Department of Education in their report noted and I quote, "Given the nature of the implementation of the core French, i.e. the increase of inservice, the port materials and the nature of the teachers selection, the relative differences between core and conversational student's attitudes must be carefully considered.

If the Core French Program is implemented on a larger scale, without implementation procedures comparable to the pi lot project, the attitud ina l differences attributable to the Core French Program may decrease." I would hope that the Minister would, and I know that she is, taking the briefs into consideration, but at the same time I realize she doesn't have a chance to read everything that is presented.

I wanted to make the point very strongly on behalf of parents whose children are in a total English setting, that it's imperative that their children get the same level of French and that they get the commitment from the department because I think without the commmitment from the department that you don't get the same programs, you don't get the same push or drive. I would like to know if the Minister can give us any encouragement at this time? HON. M. HEMPHILL: First, I will give the Member for Kirkfield Park some information, then I'l l give her some encouragement.

The school divisions who went on to increase the numbers of students were Winnipeg, St. James, St. Vital, Assiniboine South, St. Boniface, River East, Seven Oaks, Lord Selkirk, Transcona and Agassiz. Just because we are talking a reasonable amount about one of the school divisions that the member from Kirkfield Park has both specific kno wledge, 2373

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 understanding and concern for and direct involvement is the St. James-Assiniboia Board, where they started out in 1980-81 with two schools, added another two schools in '81- 82 and in '82-'83 went up to 22 schools. They received $6,865 for the students that received the $1 90 and received $5,373 for the others that were outside.

I think I'll pick up on a couple of points that you made about the briefs and first of all I am pleased they participated, that they're interested in the issue, that they're coming forward and putting their feelings about the importance of a program like this that we're on the verge of making some decisions about grants and alloca tions and programs, that they'r e tak ing the opportunity to get their licks in, so to speak, and communicate how they feel about the importance of the program and they will be listened to.

I think when the Home and School made their presentation, and they suggested that the funding was reduced because it is a complex issue, I don't think they realized that the funding wasn't reduced, that in fact there never was an agreement to fund those additional students at the 190 level; that those who were on 50 were not getting reduced funds. They decided to put them into the program and accepted that they would only received $50 for those students outside of the program.

In general, I think the points that the Member for Ki rkfield Park made about the response or the consequences, the effect of the core are true. I think the greater linguistic competency - and we could expect that double the time is going to have an effect , we would hope it would - and it also develops a more positive attitude that it is another effect . That effect probably is very important in terms of developing the competency, I think, how they feel about how valuable it is and what kind of positive feelings they have. So, that is clear. That information is clear and I think it is important information.

I guess we should just talk for a minute about the different programs that we have because we have the francais program, the immersion, the core and the conversational. I think they are very different programs, that they do have quite different goals and objectives, that people and school divisions at the present time are making some choices about which programs to go into and which programs to expand.

There are some, while we're talking about the benefits of core over conversational French, you know there are others for whom the immersion program - they don't quite want the francais - but the immersion program is really ideal and suits their needs because the core doesn't given them enough. So I think we have to recognize that we're off ering quite a reasonable variety of both access and programs to meet the interests and the needs of a variety of students because to suggest that everybody that's interested in learning French has to go immersion, has to go in up to their neck of course, is not realistic.

I think on the other hand to just say that all we need to do is offer conversational and suggest that it is giving them any real opportunities, is also not acceptable. So my guess is that the francais program has been stable, has been a fairly stable population for three years. It's been in the 6,500, 6,200. So it appears that we're meeting the needs. We've got a stable population of students there, taking francais, continuing in it and we likely are meeting most of the needs of students who are interested in the francais program because it is so stable.

The conversational French on the other hand has been staying relatively stable. It's been in the 72,000 to 77,000 range over the period of three years, so there is some stability there. The drop was this year. It went from 75,000 to 72,000 and that's because a number of the students moved from conversational into core, I think. There was a choice there to go into the core program. Where there is considerable growth and change is in immersion and core, where we've gone from 4,000 in immersion in 1980 up to 7,500, almost double in two years; and in core from 1, 300 to 8,700, more than doubled in three years.

So this clearly is the area of the greatest interest and expansion. I think it is clearly the area that we now have to look at having both adequate programs and funding. I quite agree with the point the Member for Kirkfield Park made about the importance of having adequate funding and clearly nobody would suggest that two levels of funding for the same kind of per full-time equivalent student, on the one hand at 190 and at the other hand at 50, is fair. I mean one couldn't suggest that is a reasonable level of funding.

So we clearly have to rationalize that the level of funding, the grants that are going to be given to the Core - and I agree that they should be adequate to cover the program - I think the Ed Finance Review will give us information that will help us make that decision.

So I suppose I am really supporting both her interest, her concern and the point she is making about the importance of both moving and making the decisions that are going to be made in terms of program, in terms of opportunities for the other school divisions who aren't participating and in terms of determining the funding level so that there is adequate support for all of the students that are going to be in the program. MRS. G. HAMMOND: I thank the Minister for those encouraging words.

One of the other points, too, that I was made aware with the Core French that seems to be making a difference, is the students that are moving from elementary school where they have elementary and then they all move into one junior high and then on to high school, at one time, and with the conversational French, every school even was teaching at a different level of conversational French,

whereas the core program is structured so the students are moving into junior high all at the same level. I think this has got to make a big difference because I think one of the reasons that so many students were dropping French in both the junior high and high school level is they were all dumped into a junior high and some have had a lot of French; some have had very little; there wasn't any degree of consistency at all. I think that the core program is one of the areas that when students arrive in Grade 7, they are all at pretty much the same level.

In that case not one is so much ahead, not one is so much behind and there probably won't be the same degree in dropping it. At the same time there seems to be a very great push from homes today, from parents that their children get into these 2374

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 programs and that they stay in it. I think there's a much bigger commitment from parents to the core program as well as I know there is to the immersion which is the way you want it. I think that in this case this program may turn out to be very successful moving into junior high and into senior high. In that way I think you will have more students coming out of high school with a good proficiency in French and if they need to do anything further, and wish to do anything further, they've got the skills to accomplish it.

The other thing I guess that I want to say is the big message coming through, that they really want a commitment from the department that the inservices, that the programs will all be delivered and that's a spot that they can turn to for guidance in this area. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Chairman, I think I perhaps will just accept the importance of the points made by the Member for Kirkfield Park. I think that we know there are a number of important factors, and the advantages of the core I think are the structure, the entry points, the intensity, the teacher training.

Clearly the involvement of parents you mentioned is very, very important in the success of any language program. We know that, the support of both the community and the parents. We definitely recognize the importance of upgrading and professional development programs for teachers and the importance of maintaining support to them. So we are in agreement on a number of major points I think. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(b)(1) -p ass; 7.(b)(2)- pass; 7.(c)(1), Educational Support Services, Salaries - the Member for Kirkfield Park. II/IRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes. Are there any changes in staffing in this area? HON. M. HEMPHILL: No, Mr.

Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(c) (1) -p ass; 7.(c)(2)- pass; 7.(c)(3)-pass; 7.(d)(1) , Admin istration and Bilingual Programs, Salaries - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes. Are there any changes in this area in staffing? HON. M. HEMPHILL: No, Mr. Chairman. II/IRS. G. HAMMOND: I'm moving on to Other Expenditures. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(1) -p ass; 7.(d)(2) - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes. In Other Expenditures I notice there isn't anything from 1983. There is a portion of funds in this year's. Could the Mi nister indicate what that is? HON. M.

HEMPHILL: I'm informed that's just a transfer of an appropriation for operating the bureau when it was transferred from another appropriation. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(2)- pass; 7.(d)(3) - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes. In this area is that money that is coming from the Federal Government? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Most of it, Mr. Chairman. MR. G. HAMMOND: Has there been any increase or decrease in assistance from the Federal Government? HON. M. HEMPHILL: No, not to date. We're awaiting final decisions on what the funding levels are going to be.

We're getting about $5.5 million Recovery out of about $9.5 million of expenditure. That's for the entire programs. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d)(3)- pass; 7.(e)(1) , Library and Materials Production, Salaries - the Member for Kirkfield Park. llll RS. G. HAMMOND: Yes. Has there been any increase or decrease in staffing? HON. M. HEMPHIL L: There isn't an increase in staff. We have a transfer of eight staff in this area, Mr. Chairman.

Last year we put the resource centre that was available for school divisions or that was providing service to about 11 school divisions in the province, was transferred into the bureau, and the required eight staff were there. They were put into the centre. This service, it is an additional $60,000 to run the centre. The mo ney come s back to the Text book Bu reau unfortunately, because of the way they allocate the money it does come back for the centre, but it goes into the Textbook Bureau; $60,000 added to cover for the revenue and $2 1.8 was a transfer from 7.(b)(2).

That doesn't mean anything to you and right now it doesn't mean anything to me. I think what is important to say here is that this centre is a very important resource now for all the school divisions in the province, that previously it was servicing 11 , by incorporating it into the bureau and allowing the operating money for it, we are now providing a very needed support to all the school divisions in the province. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(e)(1)-p ass; 7.(e)(2) - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: I'd just like to inquire, is there a problem in getting books for the Sciences and the Maths in the French language to cover the programs? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Chairman, I've been informed that there has been a problem. There still is a slight problem, but it's improving considerably in the last little while. MRS. G. HA llllllll OND: Could the Minister indicate if it's mainly in the elementary, or is it something that is in the junior high or senior high programs, or is it just in general? HON. 1111. HEMPHILL: I'm advised that the main problem area is senior high in the 01 courses, Mr. Chairman. 2375

Tuesday, 3 May, 1983 MRS. G. HAMMOND: Have there been any studies done within the department to see if the lack of textbooks in this area has affected the students when they're graduating or as they're going through the program? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Chairman, we haven't done any studies on that particular issue. We know that our students are performing and competing and succeeding at not only an acceptable, but at a very good level of achievement. MRS. G. HAMMOND: If there haven't been any studies done in this area, how can the Minister stand up and make that statement? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Chairman, I said that we hadn't studied - she raised a point about being a little bit behind or having a bit of trouble getting curriculum resource material. I said that we had not and she related or interpreted that or suggested that might mean that our students might be having a problem. I said we had not done a study on that and that there was no reason actually to believe that was a factor or that you could make that assumption because our students, we do follo w-ups on our grad uate students and their achievement levels, and those studies are showing that our students are achieving reasonable results. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 7.(e)(2)-pass. Resolution No. 59. Resolve that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,336,300 for Education, Bureau de !' Education Francaise, for the fiscal year ending the March 31, 19 84- pass. What is the will of the comm ittee for the next item to consider? The Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It was my understanding in consulting with my colleague, the Member for Tuxedo, that the member had spoken with the Minister and that we could possibly deal with the Capital aspect of it to some degree now and maybe discuss the lie des Chenes situation at this time. Is that agreeable? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Yes, Mr. Chairman. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Then I would like to start off by possibly, as I indicated to the Mi nister the other day when I brought up this subject, there has been so much confusion with the school situation at lle des Chenes and many problems over the years, and I'm wondering if many of the people haven't had the privilege of, let's say, having the communication that has taken place, the various letters to various groups, etc. I thought possibly if we could maybe do a bit of a background history on this and bring us up to date as to where we're at right now.

It was in, I believe, August of 19 80, when the previous administration app roved a K- 12 school for lle des Chenes. Since that time many problems have developed in terms of the site location and enrolment figures, etc. I wonder if the Minister, for starters, could maybe bring us up to date, maybe a bit of a backlog will bring us up to date of where we're at right now and then we'd like to follow that up. HON. M. HEMP HILL: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, I realize that this is an issue that has been going on for a long time, and there is a lot of interest and a lot of concern by all people involved in the community, and that it has a long history and sort of a lot of activity in the past. If the members will bear with me, I think it might be useful to take just an extra few minutes now and trace the history. I don't think it will take me very long to go through it, just point by point, without making a lot of comment on it and bringing us up to date.

Then perhaps if there are questions based on the specific information I give, the members can ask me about that. In Septem ber, 19 78, the original Notice of Intent for a 10-12 Francais Regional High School was placed by the school division to the Public Schools Finance Board. In August of 19 79, that Notice of Intent was denied by the Public Schools Finance Board; and in October 19 79, there was an appeal by the school division to the Public Schools Finance Board and an appeal to the Minister at the same time.

In July of 19 80, the Government of the Day set up a committee comp osed of trustees, members of the Public Schools Finance Board and Deputy Min ister established to review the situation. In August of 19 80, the Minister's award of a K- 12 regional school in lle des Chenes was based on a compromise solution combining additional high school space which was originally slated for Lorette Collegiate with an anticipated addition to the lle des Chenes K-9 school and created a revised app roval for a 322 student K- 12 school at lle des Chenes with 16 7 K-9 students, 15 5 for 10-12, with a total of 322.

July and August, in 19 81, there was public opposition to the site chosen by trustees. In January, 19 82, the school division submit ted sketch plans and the estimated costs were over the formula and the amount that had been allocated, so the sketch plans were not appro ved. At that time also, I believe, that the Public Schools Finance Board began to raise some concerns about the enrolment. On February 2, 19 82, Minister - which is me - meets with trustees, at which time the trustees appealed to me to proceed as quickly as possible with a K- 12 school app

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-2-59b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 2nd hansardpdf 59b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7220487c0b81daab85b7a0cb3584facb71b5c878

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