Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 67A (32nd Legislature, 4th Session)

32-4-67a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLA TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANI TOBA Tuesday, 11 June, 1985. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Petitions . Read ing and Receiving Petitions ... PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COM MITTE ES MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River East. MR. P. EYLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Member for Ste. Rose, that the Report of the Committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River East. MR. P. EYLER: Mr. Speaker , I beg to present the First Report of the Committee on Law Amendments. MR. CLERK, W. Remnant: Your committee met on Tuesd ay, May 28, 1985 at 10 :00 a.m.; Thursd ay, June 6, 1985 at 8:00 p.m.; and Tuesday, June 11, 1985 at 10 : 00 a. m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building and heard representations with respect to Bill No. 2 -

An Act to amend The Health Services Insur ance Act. Representations on Bill No. 2 were made as follows: Tuesd ay, May 28, 19 85 - 10 :00 a.m.: Dr. Bruce Te fft, Canadian Me ntal Healt h Association and Community Coalition of Mental Health, Mr. Sidney Green, Q.C., Manitoba Progressive Party, Mr. Gr eg Dunn, Preside nt , Ma nitoba Chiropractors' Association, Dr. Rivian We inerman, Assoc iation of Independent Physicians, Dr. Pia Longstaffe, Private Citizen, Dr. Wayne Longstaffe, Private Citizen. Thursd ay, June 6, 19 85 - 8:00 p.m.: Dr. Paul Shuckett, Association of Independent Physicians, Dr.

Richard Matkaluk, Private Citizen, Dr. Henry Krahn, Association of Independent Physic ians, Dr. Jeremy Gordon, Association of Independent Physicians, Mr. Waiter Kucharczyk, Private Citizen, Dr. Henri Marcoux, Private Citizen, Dr. Gilb ert Bohemier, Manitoba Chiropractors' Association. Your committee has considered: Bill (No. 2) -

An Act to amend The Health Services Insur ance Act, And has agreed to report the same with certain amendments. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River East . MR. P. EYLER: Mr. Speak er, I move, seconded by the Member for St. Johns, that the Report of the Committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports . . . Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills .. INTRODUCTION OF GU ESTS MR.

SPEAKER: Prior to Oral Que stions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have six students from Grades 5 and 6 standing from the Arthur Oliver School under the di rection of Mrs. Dick. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park. There are 24 students of Grade 5 standing from the St. Pierre Elementary School under the directio n of Mrs. Shew chuk. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Emerson. On behalf of all of all of the members, I welcome you here this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTIONS In ternational Tra de Co mmission - meeting re Man itoba hog producers MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of th e Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speak er, my question is for the Acting Premier . Today, I believe, we have the Premier and Minister of Agriculture paying official visits to governors in the United States, of various states, to put forth the cases on behalf of Manitoba hog producers with respect to reopen ing their states to the receipt of our hogs, and more importantly the news today is of a decision by the U.S.

Commerce Department· ruling that Canadian Hog Stabili zation Programs are, in fact, an unfair trading practice in their subsidy to the hog production here in Manitoba and other provinces. My understanding is that this could lead perhaps to the impositi on of permanent tariffs, and I wonder if the provi nce has yet deci ded to appear before th e International Trade Commission to put forward the case on behalf of Manitoba producers to try and avoid those permanent tariffs being put on our hogs. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. 2825

n.. eadtly, 11 June, 1985 HON. M. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, we intend to do whatever we have to do to promote the interests of our farmers here. We, as you know, have been trying to promote a fair trade across the border and we certainly would appreciate the assistance of the senior level of government, the Conservative Government in Ottawa, to assist us In this. The question is often one of what would each country call a trade subsidy, because in different countries there are different practices that amount to Intervention in the marketplace, but they have different names.

So it's an issue that is going to take quite a while to work through, but our intention throughout is to promote the interests of our farmers and to do what Is best for their production and maintaining not only the hog and beef production here, but our share of the slaughtering business as well. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, there is no question that this would be a difficulty for Manitoba producers, but it is my understanding that the U.S. Congress Department has assessed it and decided that it is an unfair trading practice and a subsidy to production that may call for them to Impose a permanent tariff.

My question to the Acting Premier is, leaving aside the rhetoric about whatever is necessary, are plans made or is the government making plans at the present time to appear before the International Trade Commission to make an official presentation and representation on behalf of Manitoba hog producers? HON. M. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I would have thought the Leader of the Opposition would understand when 1 said we would do what was necessary that it would include that and other actions as well. 1 think he infers that because the U.S .

Congress has determined in their opinion that we have an unfair trade practice, that it automatically is that. We deny that. We believe that there are different needs in different economies and that the types of practices which are appropriate to build fair trade across the borders is something that takes a lot of ongoing activity. it's unfortunate, I think, that we tend to hear a lot about free trade from our partners when things are going well for them, and when things get a little more difficult we start to hear challenges to our rights across the border. We're a smaller country, Mr.

Speak er, and sometimes our economic needs are not identical to those of our neighbour to the south. MR. G. FILMON: That's precisely my point. The U.S. Congress has one opinion and apparently the Acting Premier has another opinion. The point Is that there will be an opportunity prior to July 25th to make those views known at an official forum that could help Manitoba producers by avoiding the prospect of a permanent tariff being put on. Will her government be making those representations before the official body? That's my question. HON. M. SMITH: Mr.

Speaker, it sounds to me that the Leader of the Opposition didn't hear all the representations made by our Premier at the recent Western Premiers' Conference dealing with those very concerns. He seems to have forgotten the fact that pursuing those intere!'ts is precisely what the Premier is doing at this moment. He is meeting with the Governor in Nebraska and the Governor in Iowa to deal with one irritant that had arisen in the area. We have said that we will take the whole range of actions that are appropriate. The one that Is proposed may work out to be one of those.

I can't comment on that In particular, but if it is what is required to advance the cause of Manitoba farmers we are certainly prepared to do it. Temporary Absence Program - violation of terms MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Community Services and Corrections and the Minister responsible for the Status of Women who yesterday refused to stand up and answer a question with respect to making recommendations on mandatory release despite the incident I referred to her involving two subsequent sexual charges of a person released under mandatory supervisi on . My question to the Minister is: could she inform the House as to her guidelines for authorizing temporary absences for convicted persons held in prison? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. HON. M. SMITH: Mr.

Speaker, the question yesterday had to do with prisoners who were in the federal jurisdiction, whether there should be mandatory release after two-thirds of a sentence was served . The Attorney-General has stated the government position. I have stated it I think several months ago when the same question was asked of me, that we believe the decision should be made on a case-by case basis, rather than on an automatic provision with regard to the temporary absence practices that exist in the provincial system for prisoners who are in up to two years less a day.

I will undertake to bring the criteria to the House at a later date, but I can assure you what we do is try to balance the nature of the offence and the term of the sentence with the behaviour of the prisoner and the plan that is available for their activity outside, that I will bring the precise criteria to the House at a later date. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, could the Minister, when she brings that information to the House, advise the House how many persons escaped or absented themselves without leave while on the temporary absence program during 1983, 1984 and 1985 to date?

Would she confirm that 15 to 20 percent of those out on temporary absence violated the terms of their temporary absence leave? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader on a point of order. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speak er, the question asked by the honourable member requires a great deal of 2826

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 detailed information that the Minister would not have at her fingertips. We still have not begun the Estimates of the Department of Community Services. I'm sure that the member can phrase the question then and get that kind of detail, or if he wishes a question requiring that kind of detail, it could be filed as an Order for Re turn. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speak er, that information that I asked I think is read ily available to the Minister.

I would ask her, when she is obtaining that information, would she inform the House as to how many offences were committed by persons out on temporary absence? Would she undertake to provide this and the information I requested in my previous question to the Hous e? HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speak er, on a point of order . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader on a point of order . HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, I think clearly the point of order I raised earlier applie s to the supplementary question. I would add as well, Mr.

Spea ker , that you have admon ished mem bers on both sides with respect to the req uirements for questions in question period and have admonished Ministers who have provided long, detailed answers. Mr. Spe aker, that question invites the Minister of Community Services to provide a long, detailed answer and be su bjected to the admonishment of you and members that that kind of information shou ldn't be dealt with in question period. I think that's a fair admonishment, Sir, and I think the route of Estima tes or an Order for Return is the way to acquire the information the member solicits. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. Members will note that in the guidelines that I sent to all members that Item 2.(

j) says that a question should not be of a nature requiring a lengthy or a detailed answer. I believe the honourable member should be able to obtain that information by other methods. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Ye s, Mr. Spea ker, I am not asking for a long and detailed answer; I am asking for four or five numb ers - the num ber of persons who escaped or absented themselves while on temporary absence from prison for 1983, 1984 and 1985 to date, and the number of offences commit ted by those persons while out on temporary absence.

I would also ask the Minister, in undertaking to provide this information In my previous two questions and this question, could she advise as to whether or not the City of Winnipeg Police Department or law enforcement authorities or Crown Attorneys are involved in any way in authorizing temporary absences? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Of those two questions, I have advised the honourable member that the first one is not in order, the second one is. The Honourable Minister of Community Services. HON. M. SMITH: Mr.

Speaker , if I am clear on your ruling, you are saying that it's in order for me to comment on the Winn ipeg Police, whether they autho rized the tempor ary absences? I will take that one as notice, Mr. Speaker . Red Hot Video - distribution of tapes MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the ��inister of Cultur e and Heritage. The Minister has shown concern about hard core video tapes coming into Manitoba other than through the regular distri bution of Manitoba wholesalers and retailers.

Is he aware that on Page 1 161 of the Winnipeg Ye llow Pages of the phone book, there is an advertisement from Red Hot Video, one of Canada's leading supp liers of adult video tapes, no charge, dial an 800 number in B.C. and they can be shipped Into the province without any classification. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The awareness of a Minister is not a suitable topic for que stion period. Would the honourable member wish to rephrase his que stion to seek information? The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: Does the Minister of Culture and Heritage agree that the Manitoba telephone book, or the Winnipeg Ye llow Pages . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The honourable member is asking for an opinion. If he wishes to seek information, would he do so? MR. F. JOHNSTON: Then let's do it this way. Mr. Spea ker, I would ask the Minister what action he will take to stop advertising in a government telephone book for adult video tapes by Red Hot Video, having them sent into the province other than through the regular distribution in this province? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Cultur e.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Minister of Cultur e. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was not aware of that specific ad in the Manitoba Te lephone System busi ness directory. I certainly will investigate the matter and have discussions with my colleague, the Attorney-General, to see if there are any violations of the Criminal Code with respect to the distribution of pornographic material. Mo torcycle regis trations - decrease in nu mbers MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Speaker, I address my question to the Minister of Transportation. Sources indicated 2827

TUe�ay. 11 Julle, 181$5 that there has been a dramatic decrease in the num ber of mot orcycle registra tions in the year 19 85. I'm wondering if the Mini ster can confirm that fact and, if so, if he can give us the magnitude of the decrease in motorcycle registrations. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of High ways. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Speaker, I cannot confirm that and I cannot give the magnitude at this particular time. I can take that as notice. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Speaker, is it the Mi nister's intent to include this information along with other information I have requested for some time, once he releases his department 's anal ysis of the report presented to him? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Speaker, this is about the fowth time, I guess, the Member for Morris has asked for the information. I have indicated clearly where it's at, the report. As soon as I receive it, I was intending to bring that information to the House. In terms of this individual question, I imagine if it has been included in the request, it will be provided with the report.

If it's not, I will provide it separately, as I have taken that question as notice. Limestone Generating Station - personnel preferences MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Energy concerning the Lim estone Hydro project - or the Mini ster responsible for Hydro - and ask him whether it is in fact a goal that there be 50 percent female participation in both construction jobs and permanent positions at the generating station? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, in line with the fair employment policy for all Manitobans and since I think at least 50 percent of the population are women, over the long run, certainly there would be an objective of giving people the opportunity of taking advantage of those jobs. Whether in fact they do is up to them, Mr. Speaker. MR. R. DOERN: Can the Minister also clarify what other conditions or preferences are being given? If there is going to be a preference gi ven for women and Northerners and Natives, can the Mi nister indicate, for example, whether there will be religious or ethnic categories or quotas as well? HON. W.

PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate that this government bel ieves in fair emplo yment opportunities for all people so that they can have an opportunity to participate in the Limestone projects and the Hydro projects. We believe that southern Manitobans will have a very fair opportunity to achieve a great number of those jobs as they have in the past. We, in fact, want to ensure that more Manitobans than ever before, certainly more Manitobans than say in the '70s, do get an opportunity to participate in those jobs that are created by Lim estone.

In fact, we on this side of the House are very pleased that there will be some 19 ,000 employment opportunities, both di rect and indi rect, created for Manitobans with the Limestone project. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Well, Mr . Speaker, again holding aside the Min ister's somewhat inflated figures, I simply ask him this, if an ordin ary person applies for a job in connection with this project and he is not a Northerner or not a Native, if it is a man instead of a woman, etc., doesn't that lessen the opportunities? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please.

The honourable member's question is hypothetical. The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I would simply ask the Mini ster how he can say on one hand that there are all these preferences being given, and on the other hand, that an ordinary person has a chance when preferences are being given all over the place? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The honour able member's question is clearly argumentative. If the honourable member wishes to obtain information, would he kindly so frame his question? MR. R.

DOERN: I'll go back to my earlier point and simply say to him again, in addition to preferences being given to women and Northerners and Natives, are there any other special categories that would exclude an ordinary person from applying? HON. W. PARASIU K: Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House believe that Natives, that Northerners and that women are ordinary Manitobans. We on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker , try and promot e job opportunities for ordinary Manitobans.

What the question misses is the point that years back when Hydro projects were under way, there were a number of people in our society who weren't getting a fair opportunity to partake in those jobs in the North; these were Northern Manitobans; these were Natives whose communitie s had been disru pted by a lot of development taking place and lot of women weren't getting a fair opportunity to participate in those job opportunities. We bel ieve that it is pos sible to provide fair opportunities for all those people in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker. We are not ashamed of trying to do that.

We think that we will achieve a lot more, Mr. Speaker, over the next eight years than was achieved in the past and we think that that's part of responsible policy. Senior citizen premises - permission to canvass MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Memb er for Rhineland. 2828

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speak er. My question is to the absent First Minist er. Mr. Speaker, I attended a meeting of senior citizens last night where concern was expressed that membe rs of the New Democratic Party were being extremely insistent, in apartment blocks where seniors signed the petitions protesting the partial de-indexing of the old age pensions, and that the New Democratic Party members canvassing these blocks are not receiving clearance to do so from management.

My question is, will the Acting First Minister make certain that proper channels are followed, permission attained and security measures not breached when canvassers enter these senior citizens' premises? MR. SP EAKER: Orde r pl ease. I wonder if the Honour able Memb er for Rhineland would wish to rephrase his question so that the su bject matter is clearly within the responsibility of the competence of the government. The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Mr. Speaker, security measures are being breached.

Permission is not being obtained from apartment management in order for New Democratic Party members to walk into apartment blocks where seniors reside in order for them to sign petitions protesting the de-indexing of the federal pension plan. Will the Minister see to it that these security measures are not breached, and that undue pressure not be put on senior citizens in order for them to sign these petitions? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I don't believe that ad mission to apartment bl ocks is within the administrative competence of the government. Cap ital gains - repeal of elimination MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speak er, I have a question for the Acting Mini ster of Fi nanc e. Will it be the government's intention to repeal the provincial provision allowing for elimination of capital gains on the sale of farmland? If so, at what point in time will that repeal become effective? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Co operative Development. HON. J. COWAN: Mr.

Speak er, to make certain that I understand the intent of the question from the Member for Turtle Mountain, I propose that we take it as notice and I advise the Minister of Finance of the question and have him respond in more detail as soon as he returns to the Hous e. Bois sevain Land Titles Offi ce - contin uance of MR. B. RANSOM: I have a question for the Attorney General. Mr. Speaker, is it the government's intention to continue to operate the court facilities in the old Land Titles Office in Boissevain? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Ye s, Mr. Speaker .

Manfor - modernization of MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. D. GOURLAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I have a question for the Minister respo nsible for Manfor. Can the Minister advise if the computer foul up in connection with the modernization at Manfor is now rectified? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Business Dev elopment. HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Speake r, I spoke this morning with the chairman of the board. I understand that the majority of the problems have been overcome. There have been production runs, and I think we can say, optimistically , that things have sorted thems elves out.

MR. D. GOUR LAY: A further question to the same Minister , in view of the recent improvement in the lumb er market situation in Manitoba, I wonder if this will be reflected in an earlier startup of the activities at Manfor. HON. J. STORIE: Certain ly, Mr. Speak er, that will have some impact. That would depend on the duration of this slight rally in lumber prices, and the management at Manfor will be observing the market very carefully . lt was indicated earlier that, depending on the inventory and the price, there may be an earlier callback. Manfor - marketing through exclusive age ncy MR. D.

GOURLAY: A further supple menta ry to the same Minister , can the Minister advise if Manfor will soon by marketing its lumb er production through an exclusive wholesale agency, rather than the present in-house operation? HON. J. STORIE: Mr. Speaker , Manfor is continually looking for ways to improve the marketing of its product. They have been exploring a numb er of options. I do not believe that the memb er's sugge stion is correct at this point, but obviously they are looking at all kinds of ways to increase their access to different markets.

If that is one of the ways that can be achieved it certainly would be foolish for them not to look at it. Northern Flood Ag reement - Cr oss Lake Band MR. SPEAKER: The Ho no ura ble Member for Rupertsland. MR. E. HARPER: I would like to direct my question to the Minister responsible for the Northern Flood 2829

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 Agreement. In view of the fact that Chief Waiter Monia s of Cross Lake has told the Department of Indian Affairs to keep their hands off the proposed $12 million Hydro compensation settlement, could the Minister inform this House, and also the band members of Cross Lake, as to the Manitoba Government position on this matter? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Northern Affairs. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Hydro has made an offer of $12 million to the Cross Lake Band under the Northern Flood Agreement.

We are of the opinion, and we support the band's position, that the $12 million should be put into a trust fund in the band's name, rather than in a trust of the Federal Government. MR. E. HARPER: Mr. Speaker, in the leaked report from the Task Force on fed eral spending which suggested a buy out or cash settlement for Northern Flood Committee Bands . . MR. SPEAKER: Question. MR. E. HARPER: . . . which would relieve the Federal Government of any future responsibility; could the Minister inform, or has he received any correspondence or set up meetings to deal with this matter? HON. H. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Speaker, there has been no contact from the Federal Government on this issue, but it does appear that the Federal Government is preparing to implement many of the programs of the leaked document. The Manitoba Government is very concerned that they do not move away from some of the responsibilit ies that they have for Indian people under the Constitution. We, as a province, will continue to press the Federal Government to live up to the responsibili ties that they have to the Indian people of Canada. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Mini ster of Energy and Min es, the Mini ster responsible for Manitoba Hydro. Will Manitoba Hydro be instructed to pay the $12 million in question directly to the band and not to the Federal Government? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, that certainly is part of the negotiations. We have, in fact, been negotiating with the band. The Federal Government has its own responsibili ties, and they have been negotiating with the band, as well. So our assumption has been that the monies would be, in fact, going to the band. MR. B.

RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, will the Minister instruct Manitoba Hydro to pay the $12 million to the band and not to the Department of Indian Affairs? HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, we certainly will support the band's position. The reason why I'm not saying about instructing to do this or that is that the negotiations are under way. The band has to decide whether, in fact, they will be accepting that or whether they'll be coming back with a counterproposal. Certainly, Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House, feel that the band should receive support in its position.

We have been, in fact, negotiating with the band, and it is our intention to pay the money to a trust account held by the band. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, it is evident that the band would like to receive the $12 million directly. What is this government negotiating when the band has already indicated their desire and the exchange of questions between the Member for Rupertsland and the Minister respon sibl e for the No rthern Flood Agreement seems to indicate that the government sides with the band, what is there to negotiate? HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, clearly the Member for Turtle Mountain is not aware of the details of the situation where it is clearly the fact that there has not been any agreement yet on the amount of compensation. Manitoba Hydro has made, in fact, a proposal; the band, I think, has hired a consultant, they are looking at it, they may be coming back with a counter-proposal; that is the state of the negotiations, Mr. Speaker. But, in terms of the principle of whether in fact we would pay to the band in the event of some settlement being reached, certainly that principle is established.

Northern Flood Agreement - appointment of arbitrator MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister respo nsibl e for the No rthern Flood Agreement. Can the Mini ster advise the House when he expects that an arbitrator will be appointed? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of Northern Affairs. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Member for Turtle Mountain would have more luck getting an answer on that question if he contacted his counterparts in Ottawa, because it is in their hands of when the appointment will be made. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, a further question to the Min ister responsibl e for Northern Affairs. The Minister indicated some months ago that he expected that there would shortly be announcements respecting settlement of Treaty Land Entitlement claims. Can the Minister give an indication to the House when he expects those settlements to be made? HON. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Speaker, last week, during the discussion on the Constitution, members from the Treaty Land Entitlement made contact with the Federal Minister responsible for Treaty Land Entitlement, Mr. Crombie, and he said he would be responding very quick ly.

We have a request in to him for a meeting, and he said that we will be having a meeting very quickly where there are two outstanding issues we still have to resolve, and it has to be done at the min isterial level. 2830

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 MR. B. RANSOM: A further question for the Minister of Northern Affairs. Has the province and the negotiating commit tee for the bands worked out to their own satis fact ion the basis for the settlement of the outstanding claims? HON. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Speaker, it is a tripartite negotiation and the negotiations go on at three levels. We feel that we have arrived at our position and there are two outstanding issues that the Federal Government has to agree to, and once that is agreed to then we will have an agreement. Ine qualities of system MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR.

R. DOERN: I would like to direct a question to the Mini ster of Community Services and ask her if she could clarify some of her comments that she made to the recent national conference that she eo-hosted in Winnipeg? As I understood her remarks, she said that she was going to set two goals: she was going to replace men, and replace the system. Can she explain what she meant by that? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. HON. M. SMITH: Mr.

Speaker, I think the member has picked up on a qu ote that I was re ading in my introductory comments at the conference when I was paying tribute to our colleague, Mary Beth Dolin, and quoting from a statement that she made to the press when she resigned. Mr. Speaker, she was, of course, addressing not the elimination of men or dis placement of them by women, but the current inequalities, economic and social, which exist for women, and the desire of women and of an increasing number of men to redress those inequalities.

That was what she was referring to in terms of changing the system; it was changing the status quo in order to achieve more equality. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnks ter. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since there are no more questions apparently coming forward, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce to the Legislature a Member for the State Legislature in North Dakota, Ms. Mary Kay Sauter. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to point out to my fellow members of the Legislature that this past year there ha ve certainly been some di fferences of opinion expressed by some legislators in North Dakota towards Manitoba, and . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. order please. May I remind the honourable member we are in Oral Question Period and he should not take up the time of the House with other matters. Oral Questions. 2831 MR. D. SCOTT: Mr. Speaker, may I have leave then, since there were no more questions coming forward from the opposition. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. D. SCOTT: May I have leave?

ORAL QUESTIONS Cont'd MR. SPEAKER: Order please. May I suggest the honourable member make his point after Oral Question Period. Man itoba Metis Federation - status of Statement of Land Claim MR. SPEA KER: The Honou rable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Attorney-General. Could he advise the House of the status of the Statement of Land Claim filed by the Manitoba Metis Association? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: That appears to be dormant, Mr. Speaker.

I think the House has been advised some time ago, over a year ago, that it was my opinion, the opinion of senior officials, that there was no liability on the part of the Province of Manitoba. The Federation was advised that was our position after the issue was carefully researched, and the ball is in their court. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I simp ly rise on a point of order and ind icate to you, Sir, that I am sure the House would be pleased to acknowledge any visitor, as is our custom, to this Chamber if it were proposed to us in an appropriate manner. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. If there are no further oral questions, the time for Oral Questions has expired. Order please, order please. Before recognizing the Honourable Member for lnks ter, I would just remind him that it has been the practice of the House that visitors are introduced from the Chair. The Honourab le Member for lnk ster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. May I have leave to make a non-political statement? MR. SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) NON-POLITICAL STATEMENT MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for lnkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I fully appreciate that normally the Speaker introduces guests to the Legislature and guests in the gallery. In

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 this instance, unfortunately, the member just arrived before we went into question period and didn't have time to notify the Speaker's Office before I knew that our guest had arrived into the House. But, as I was saying earlier, or starting to say at least, Ms.

Sauter has had a very solid record in the State of North Dakota in supporting the initiatives of the Province of Manitoba; in supporting the friendship between the good State of North Dakota and the Province of Manitoba; and we in this province are certainly very indebted to members like herself who will stand up in their Legislature and protect the friendship and the neighbour liness of our border province and state. I am very grateful that we have members, such as Ms.

Sauter, in the House as we have members here expressing their good friendship back and forth between the State of North Dakota and the Province of Manitoba. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. COMMITTEE CHANGE MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MRS. D. DODICK: I have a committee change, Mr. Speaker, for Public Utilities and Natural Resources, the Member for Rupertsland substituting for the Member for Concordia. COMMITTEE CORRECTION MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Speaker, before we proceed to Orders of the Day I am wondering if I could make a correction in Hansard, Page 37, of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments. I was quoted as asking Mr. Kucharczyk to hurry on in his speech in Law Amendments the other night, and I don't bel ieve I was even in the comm ittee room. So I don 't know how my name came forth. MR. SPEAKER: The correction is duly noted. ORDERS OF THE DAY HOUSE BUSINESS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would propose to move the House into Commi ttee of Supply to continue discussion of the Estimates of Industry, Trade and Techno logy , and the Depart ment of Education. Mr. Speaker, I would ask first if there is leave to dispense with Private Members' Hour. MR. SPEAKER: Is there leave to dispense with Private Members' Hour today? Leave has not been granted. HON. A. ANSTETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Mini ster of Education, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the Hous e resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be grante d to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for River East in the Chair for the Department of Education; and the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Industry, Trade and Technol ogy. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUP PLY - INDUSTRY, TRADE AND TECHN OLOGY MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Committee, please come to order. We are now on Item No. 2.(c)( 1) Trade: Salaries; 2.(c)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, the trade division at one time had - I guess you would call - Manitoba salesmen or Manitoba representatives who made trips into United States and other parts of Canada, mainly Western Canada, on a regular basis to contact the Canadian Emba ssies or Consulates in the area out of the countr y and to try and bring Ma nitoba manufacturers together with potential buyers in other areas. Is that program or is that policy still being carried out? MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: The general thrust is still ongoing; it's not quite as the member describes though. lt does take that form from time to time where the export or trade development officers do visit outside of the province either on their own or sometimes they lead delegations of the private sectors. As an example, we have had delegations to Australia; three delegations of one trade officer and a number of private sector people to Australia to help develop that market for Manitoba farm equipment manufacturers. They also do the same in other sectors and other markets.

They also are very active here with groups that come into Manitoba, that are trade staff of the Federal Government. We recently had a good number of the trade officers from the various Consulate offices throughout the world in Manitoba for a few days and we had some briefings with them and also got them together with some private sector people. So those same initiatives take a number of forms and they also are active in trade shows with Manitoba companies, basically outside of the province. MR. F. JOHNSTON: How many trade shows are they scheduled to take

part in this year? HO N. E. KO STY RA: Ther e are 10 tr ade shows scheduled for participation at the present time, and we anticipate there would be a few more in addition to that, that have not been formally scheduled. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Could we have a breakdown of how many there are in Canada and how many there are in other countries? 2832

Tu .. day, 11 June, 1985 HON. E. KOSTYRA: Just to clarify from my last comment, the trade shows that I mentioned are ones where staff are involved with some form of provincial exh ibit along with individual private sector companies. There are a number of other shows that we support the private sector going to without any staff involvement other than financial support to the specific companies to attend those shows. Maybe I'll just give an overview of some of the general activities which include the shows.

There is planned an equipment mission later this summer to Australia, to attend the Australian field days in addition to that specific exhibition or show. There is going to be other work done in Australia by staff and the companies that will be attend ing.

There is also planned a trade mission to Denver; involvement at a trade fair in Minneapolis; the Host Tee Show in Toronto; the West Pach Ill in Edmonton; Montr eal International Software Ma rket Show; the Arfex'85 Food Show in Calgary; Agri-Trade Exhibition in Red Deer; there is an Ag-China Show in Peking, China, where we are not going directly, but we 'll be providing support to exhibi tors; building product show in Bloomington and Montana Agri-Trade Exhibition in Billings, Montana.

We recently had involvement at the We stern Canada Farm Progress Show in Regina, I think - oh, I'm ahead of myself - this next weekend and there is a Northern Farm Show in Minneapolis. There is also an information booth at the 1.1.1. Show in Garden City, Kansas; Agro component Exposition in Desmoines, Iowa; Hu sky Harvest Days in Nebraska; and at the Prairie Implement Manufa ctur ers Asso ciation Convention, we have an information booth. MR. F. JOHNSTON: What is the formula for support for these companies? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: We provide assistance for the general space at group shows and assist companies with their individual exhibits at the sh ow. The companies are responsible for their own travel cost to the shows. In regard to tr avel or solo shows, we provide assistance to a maximum of $2,000 on a 50 percent cost-shared basis, including costs, such as, travel, cost of the exhibition exhibit, related costs to having that exhibit put together th ere, but do not include per diem or hotel or meal costs. Those are for solo shows. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Has there been an addition to this department, the increase of $47,000.00? HON.

E. KOSTYRA: Ye s, there is an increase of one staff person, one export development officer . MR. F. JOHNSTON: The Australian trip is taking in what in Australia, what show? HON. E. KOSTYRA: it's a show called Field Days which is their major agricultural show. I'm told there's three shows that all occur within a period of time in last August, early Septemb er. They call them Field Shows in Australia, that is their term for trade shows, but they're three separate shows. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: What companies will be going from Manitoba , and will Manitoba department emp loyees be going with a Manitoba booth in this particular case? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The format is we are part of the Canadian exhibition space there. The province will have a small information counter there. There will be one trade officer attending the show and we anticipate about six companies will participate; specific companies haven't confirmed. Last year when we went to a similar sho w ther e was Behlen -Wicks, Keith Ind ustries, Mo narch Ind ustries, Sonar Rosed ale, West field Industries, Farm King. MR. F.

JOH NSTON: Does the Min ister have any estimate of the amount of sales that was generated by the shows last year? HON. E. KOS TYRA: Is the qu estion on just the Australian shows or all of the shows? MR. F. JOHNSTON: Just a figure that the department feels was generated by the attendance of trade shows last year. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Oh, totaL From the group shows the sales are just over $7 million. From the solo shows the figure is $9.8 million. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Chairman, in the list of shows it's very obvious and, of course, the government has said that the y're not going to participate in the Pacific Expo in B.C. When I was in Regina at the Premiers' Conference, it was indicated then in the conference that all provinces would be attending except Manitoba. lt came up around the Premiers' table that the Prime Minister and the Premier of B.C. said, he hoped that everybody would be there ; and the answer came back, well you better speak to the Premier of the Province of Manitoba.

I have since seen a map of Canada reg arding Pacific Expo which has Ontario joining Saskatc hewan showing Canada with Manitoba left out.

I can say that during that Premiers' meeting - and I believe the Minister was there for part of it or all of it - that the show is being regarded as one of the best kickoff points or kickoff shows for the sale of Canadian products anywhere in the world, but certainly to the Pacific Rim area; and cert ainly Canada is planning to have as large a sales force as they can there; and certainly all of the other provinces are going to be taking a great participation in this particular show, and Manitoba is being left out HON. E. KOSTYRA: Not quite. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: Well, I would ask the Minister what Manitoba's participation is because the announcements have been that there would be no Manitoba pavilion. I bel ieve there was some mention of an information booth or something of that nature. What is Manitoba's participation going to be? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Manitoba does not, nor will Manitoba have a separate pavilion at Expo '86. What we have decided to do is to participate In the Canadian Pavilion in the World Business Showcase. The Canadian Pavilion has its focus on Canadian busi ness and we will have space in the Canadian Pavilion, approxima tely 2833

Tuesdar, 11 June, 1985 570 square feet. The total cost of participating in that pavilion will be approximately $200,000, including the staffing and development of the appropriate exhibit. The objective of our involvement in the busi ness showcase is to promote trade and investment interest in the Province of Manitoba.

The decision was made to focus in strictly on business activity as part of Expo '86, and given that the Canadian Pavilion, the World Business Showcase that has been developed is in downtown Vancouver, we thought that would be an appropriate place and seems, from what we understand, to be the centre of business activity related and business interest in Expo '86. So we feel that for a reasonable expenditure of money we will have the opportunity of getting significant traffic from the business sector who will be, in particula r, looking at the World Business Showcase. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: Is there going to be any emphasis on tourism in the Manitoba booth? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes, Tourism Manitoba will be participating in the booth. Though its location is in, as I said, the business centre. The Canadian Pavilion is separate though, connected by rapid transit to the main Expo '86 site, but it is a separate site in downtown Vancouver. MR. F. JOHNSTON: The $200,000 is not in this particular budget then, or is it? HON. E. KOSTYRA: No, it is not contained here.

Most of the money will be coming out of next year's budget, or there may be a little bit that we'll have to find this year under Expenditures and other areas in order to do some of the work prior to the next fiscal year. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Assiniboia. MR. R. NORDMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Have you any idea what tourism will spend on that same Expo? HON. E. KOSTYRA: I can't answer the question. They are looking at some options and terms. MR. R. NORDMAN: In other words then, there has not been a joint move between Tourism and Industry to develop any kind of a rapport on that? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Yes, the offer to participate was made not that long ago by the Federal Government. We accepted the offer. I think about four or five weeks ago Cabinet decided to participate, and staff from the respective departments are now cons ulting on an appropriate booth and display, though the total costs will be within the $200,000 outside of other costs for leaflets that would normally be printed. MR. R.

NORDMAN: On any of these other - I don't want to call them junk ets, because I know they're not - your trips of Industry and Trade to Australia and Denver and Minneapolis, are there any joint tourism exploiting of that? Do you work together at all in those instances? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The staff take the relevant information from tourism brochures and that kind of material. Tourism, I know, does some of its own work in some of its key market areas. Some of the areas that we go into are not areas that are target for tourism development.

For example, Australia is not an area that the Department of Business Development and Tourism sees as a sig nificant touris t mar ket for Manitoba. But staff do have the information and are able to provide it; and it is available on display at those shows that they attend. MR. R. NORDMAN: But the key note in your travelling is Trade and Industry. HON. E. KOSTYRA: The main focus of these shows that we're talkin g about is pred ominantly the development of export markets and they tend to be focused in on particular areas.

Agricultural shows tend to deal only with agricultural implements, food shows with Manitoba food prod ucts, shows reg arding aerospace with aerospace products. Those shows tend to be very focused for particular industry sectors. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, the Minister in his opening remarks, he said, "In addition, there will be increasing activity in the forthcoming year in the area of international tr ade nego tiations." The word "negotiations," can the Minister just elaborate a bit on that? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The Federal Mi nis ter of Internationa l Trade, Mr.

Kel leher, has opened up consultation with all of the provinces on issues related to trade and we've had two meetings of all the federal provincial and territorial re_presentatives in regard to trade. He's indicated, as the bilateral discussions with the United States proceed, that he sees significant involvement with the provinces in that area. In regard to the multila teral GATT negotiations, they also are open to having provincial governments involved in those discussions.

So my comment in my opening remarks was in relation to that position of the Federal Government which is going to require much more involvement from the provinces, and an area that Manitoba in particular has not been actively involved with in a negotiation or discussion stage with the Federal Government to the extent that it appears to be happening now. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Just to follow through, and ensuring maximum Manitoba spinoff from the Limestone Hydro project - we're talking about export here - what relationship does this department have with that and what is meant by that statement? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: The Industrial Benefits Branch has been part of the Trade Branch and has the same as we've provided for seminars with regard to purchas ing, that is taking pla ce with respect to Limestone by the Industrial Capabilities Unit of the Trade Branch. So the responsibility has been of this branch. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(c)( 1) -p ass; 2.(c)(2)- pass. Resolution 10 4: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,51 9,300 for 2834

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 Indus try, Trade and Te chn ology, Industry and Trade Divisions, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1986- pass. Item No. 3.(a)

(1) Tec hnology Division, Tec hnology: Salaries; 3.(a)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, I notice further down we have the Grant Assistance to the Manitoba Research Council which provides the funding for the Te chnology Centre and the Food Products Development Centre. I'd ask the Minister, is that the place to discuss the technology and food centre? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Ye s. MR. F. JOHNSTON: The Minister says with the trans fer of information ma nagement function, back to the Department of Finance, the Information Tec hnology Group now consists of four primary res ponsiblities ... MR. CHAIRMAN: We haven 't called 3.(

b) yet. Does the member want me to call the whole block? MR. F. JOHNSTON: 3.(b)? HON. E. KOSTYRA: 3.(

b) is the Information Tec hnology. MR. F. JOHNSTON: I'm sorry. MR. CHAIRMA N: We can go to (

b) by passing (a). MR. F. JOHNSTON: No. Then I'd ask the Minister, because it provides the science and technology service to goverment and ind ustry . I wonder if he could elaborate on that. HON. E. KOSTYRA: There has been a reorg anization with respect to the Tec hnology Branch in the department and the relat ionship to the Manitoba Research Council. As the member is probably aware, previously the director of the Tec hnology Branch of the department and the executiv e director of the Manitoba Research Council were, in essence, the same person or combined in the same position.

They have now been separated with a separate director of the Tec hnology Branch in the department, and the Manitoba Research Council is in the process of sele cting an executive director for the Research Council itself. So what is now in place is a small div ision in the department di rectly on technology with a director and five professional product development staff.

The respon sibility of the branch is working with ind ustry on te ch nological devel opment and is resp onsible for the admin istration of six Jobs Fund programs that are in the area of technological related initiatives including the Te chnology Commercialization Program, St rategic Research Sup port Program, Tec hnology Advoc acy, Tec hnology Dialogue and the Gradua te Scholarship Program. So there is that spread now between the department and the council in terms of staffing. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Chairman, what does this department do as far as transferring technology information or what is their procedure for transferring technology information to industry? I just don't see what programs they have that would be assisting industry as far as technology is concerned. Do the industries come to this department and ask them to research new technologies or . . . ? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: The branch is a Policy Branch in terms of the broad area of technology and is res ponsi ble, as I mentio ned , for te chnolo gy programming under the Jobs Fund which includ es the technology commercialization programs of the Jobs Fund which are vehicles for assistance for private sector compa nies in the area of technolo gy, commercializa tion, technology transfer from universities to the private sector. So they are a branch that looks after - it's the broad policy areas for government on technology and specific programming through the Jobs Fund. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: The broad strategy of promoting technology adapt ion while exploring nich es for technology creat ion, several important new initiatives have been launched in the past year. I wonder If the Minister could give us some of those initiatives. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Some of those initiatives were the ones I mentioned that are funded out of the Jobs Fund. There is also a technology dialogue program to get both busine ss and labour dis cussing the benefits and difficulties arising out of te chnological change.

Staff of the department have also been very involved in the devel opment of the Workplace Innovation Centre which has received first read ing in the Legislatu re, and I believe will be recei ving second read ing sponsored by the Mi nister of Em ployment Services and Economic Security . But it's been really a creat ion of this department with involvement from that department and also the Department of Labour . Staff of the branch have been quite involved in the development of that proposal, working with the Labour and Busin ess Advis ory Committ ee that was in place, to explore that idea or that concept.

They were involved with that joint committee in writing the report that was submit ted to both myself and the Minister of Labour early last fall on the development of a Workplace Innovation Centre for the Province of Manitoba.

We have also been involved in advocacy program to dis seminate information to the private sector on evolving areas in the te ch nology field and have organized sponsorship through the Jobs Fund of a number of dialogue sessions on specific areas of te chn ological devel opment where the re has been morning seminars arranged for the busi ness community to deal with some specific areas and to bring in people who ha ve some expertise in relevant areas of technological development.

We 're also involved in commencing negotiations that resulted in a Memorandum of Unde rstanding between the Federal and Provincial Governments on science and techno logy, and we'll be continuing discussions with the Federal Government on areas of joint co operation in the area of technological development. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr . Chairman, where do the negotiations stand with the Federal Government on the 2835

T"e�ay, 11 June, 1985 new scienc e and NRC technology centre for the Province of Manitoba? HON. E. KOSTYRA: They're at a state that we're awaiting formalization from the Federal Government on their commitment or levels of support to the centre. The Fed eral Gover nment ha s annou nced the appointment of an implementation commit tee and have named the Chair of the commi ttee, Dr. Wedepohl, and I understand that at this moment they're working on getting other members of the task force. I would expect that they'll be making an announcement in terms of the actual commencement of the task force in the near future.

The Provincial Government has indicated that we would be willing to locating part of the Manitoba Research Council's facilities in the institute, in essence renting space from the centre, if that would help facilita te the Federal Government's commitment to the national centre in Manitoba. The position we've taken is we still believe that there is a need for a national centre as was first envisaged many years ago and has been continually worked on through to governments in the Province of Manitoba and a great many people with the public and private sector.

We feel that the Federal Government has to make a commitment to that centre and also has to give some level of federal funding support. We recognize that they feel a need to reduce the amount of money that the Federal Government may have to put into that centre, but until such time as they put their money on the table we feel we're not in a position to formalize any agreement. The Federal Min ister quite frankly seems to have trouble getting that from his colleagues, because I met with him in February of this year and we came away from that meeting with an agreement that that's what was going to take place.

Subsequently in May, when he came back, he was not able to secure any firm commitment of funding from his colleagues. We've indicated that once he does that, then we can formal ize Provincial Government involvement and put that into a form of agr eement between the Federal and Provincial Governments. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Well, Mr. Chairman, it sounds like a stand-off. Here we have the Mini ster saying he wants to know what the Federal Government is going to do, and the Federal Government obviously can't make any decisions on what their program is going to be within the centre until they get the report from Dr.

Wedepohl. They have committed themselves to working with government industry to make this work. 1 would ask the Mini ster: when does your lease run out on the Technology Centre? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Just to respond to the comment, there was a clear understanding in February of where we would be going and my understanding was there would be a formal agreement from the Fed eral Government on that, and for whatever reason that wasn't able to take place.

We've indic ated that our position is clear; we will be willing to provide the support through the movement of the MR C to that centre, but we also have to have a like commitment from the Federal Government. In terms of the leasl3 in the centre, it expires in July of 1986. There are provisions for a renewal of up to 5 years which could be done on a year-to-year basis or on a one-year basis if need be. So the timing, if the Federal Government is able to bring the centre back on track, I think would fit quite well in terms of when the construction is to be completed, which I understand is around December, January.

If they are able to get it operational, then we could move in within six months, and it would not mean any additional cost because we would have to find other people to lease the space because the lease would be up in July of next year in any case. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Well, I would like to follow the Mi nister properly. The Federal Government has asked you to pay the rent for the space that the Technology Centre would take up in that building? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Have they asked for any other costs from the province other than the rent for space? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Not at the present time, and we had proposed as part of the agreement that we had tentative approval on, that there would be reference to the fact that there would be no further di rect Provincial Government assistance to the centre and that was tentatively agreed to by the Federal Minister. Again, unfortunately, he couldn't get any agreement from his colleagues on formalizing that commitment. MR. F. JOHNSTON: But the Provincial Government was willing to enter into an agreement on the basis of paying rent only and having some knowledge of what the Federal Government was going to do? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Yes, the position we took is that if the move of the Manitoba Research Council into that building would facilitate the development of the national centre, then we were willing to do that. If our move into that building would not accomplish or not bring about that development, then we weren't interested in moving. In other words, if we moved in and then the Federal Government decided to rent the rest of the space out to whoever, we had no intention or don't have any intention of moving in there unless it's part of a development to make tha t national technology centre happen.

We are not just moving in there to help pay the rent of that building; we are moving in there to help bring about the National Technology Centre. So if the Federal Government decides down the road that they are going to rent it out for boutiques or someth ing, then we have no interest whatsoever in moving the Manitoba Research Council in there. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Well, Mr. Chairman, Dr. Wedepohl has been asked to investigate it all and put it altogether for a recomme ndation to the Federal Government on how it can operate and I'm sure that Dr.

Wedepohl would be interested in knowing, when he makes his presentation, what the Provincial Government is willing to do. He is going to say, if you do this, the Provincial 2836

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 Government will participate this way and then there will be a final program of what can happen and will have to be decided on. I am just saying to the Min ister, I am quite in agreement with him that it shouldn't be moving the technology centre into a place where a boutique is, but if there is no question that Dr. Wedepohl's report is going to be an important factor as to the final decisions of how the centre is going to be operated.

I am informed by my own MP that the Wedepohl Report is being waited for so that they can come up with a program, but they can't really come up with it until they have the doctor's report. I might say that there was a time when there was a consideration of moving the technology centre just near the new national research facility, and now we have an opportunity to be right in it, which I think is a benefit. Of course, the Mi nister realizes that this report - and it was in September of 19 80 - recommended to the Federal Government by the task force that it should come to Manitoba.

Then this report also discus ses different areas it could go into and recommendations of areas and it also made a recommendation that it could be part of the core plan and then the core took it over. I wasn't involved after that but the Minis ter was and it was moving ahead on that basis. Now we have had a change in government who is looking at another way of operating it. The intention was always, a long way back, that Manitoba would have some participation.

Let me read it to him, it's recommendation No. 7: "lt is also recommended the institute will be located in central Winnipeg if it can be integrated with other industrial and technical training activities in the area.

No. 8: lt is recommended that the eventual operating level of staff in the laboratory be about 15 0 people of which 12 5 would be NRC laboratory staff, 5 TIS staff and 20 would be Manitoba Research Council staff." I personally didn't like the idea of that, but I would ask the Min ister, if you did move in and pay rent for the Technology Centre, you would be responsible for your technology centre staff, would you? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes, we would. If we could have the same kind of ratio that the member mentions - 12 0 NR C staff to 20 MRC staff, I think we would find that quite acce ptable.

I think the ratio in the Federal Government's mind has changed considerably. The other point I would just like to make in response to the comments was the conc ern the memb er expressed ab out Dr. Wedepohl not kn owing the Provi ncial Gove rnment's posit ion. He kn ows the Provincial Government's position quite clearly because I told it to him di rectly when I had the opportunity of meet ing with him the da y his ap pointment was annou nced.

I also indicated to him, that notwithstanding the fact that the province was not formally part of the implementation committ ee or task force, that we are prepared to work with his committee to help bring about a favourable and a go od realistic report on the implementation of the centre. So we have indicated very clearly to him what the Province of Manitoba is prepared to do in terms of the building itself. We have also indicated to him that we are willing to sit down and work with his committee to help him develop a proposal that hopefully will find favour with the Federal Government. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: lt would appear then, to me anyway, that the request being made by the Federal Government to have Dr. Wedepohl come up with a report that will pull this altogether, to me it's an indication that there is a seriousness of wanting to have it. Because of some of the poor experiences in National Research Council labs in some of the areas that have not worked too clear ly, th at the

part icipat ion of busi ness and government is a desirable one, and one that seems to be working better. Dr. Wedepohl is a man who's had experience in his own country, in the country of his birth, and in Manitoba and in many other areas where· he has worked with universities, technology centres and government and industry, and had the experience of them all working together with efficiency. it's a tough one. You may recall that there was a report put together headed by General McKenzie for Mr. Axworthy on the aerospace technology trading centre.

One of the problems in that particular centre is that it was an excellent report, but everybody was saying, you know, if I put all this money in, what am I going to get out of it? Those are the problems that have to be overcome. Dr. Wedepohl is capable of doing that with his experience, but it has to be made clear that the Provincial Government is willing to move ahead if they agree with the report of Dr. Wedepohl as far as the operation of the centre is concerned. I don't think that the Federal Government can move ahead without having some commitment.

They must know that they're going to have to make some commitment to it for the future, but I wouldn't like the Provincial Government to put themselves in a position of being dogmatic about this, because it would be a natural to have your research, your technology centre in that building. The other reason, as I mentioned, I wasn't always too happy about having to pay the staff of anybody in that centre because it was federal, but the day that you're not involved is the day that you can be pushed out of the benefit of it.

If it's in Manitoba, Manitoba should have some say of what type of operation or have some way of getting clear benefits from having it in this province. If you turn it over to somebody else completely, you just have to take whatever their decision is. If the government has the opportunity to be involved by moving something that they have now, which I might say was 60 percent paid for by the Federal Government, into that Technology Centre, we should probably be looking to take advantage of it. HON. E. KOSTYRA: The Provincial Government has not been dogmatic in terms of development of that centre.

I think if one looks back at the history of how that centre or that concept developed, it was because of the initiative by the Provincial Government and people in the Province of Manitoba far before I came on the scene as a member of this Legislature or the Mi nister responsible. lt was because of that drive . MR. F. JOHNSTON: lt was me. 2837

Tuesday , 11 June, 1985 HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes. lt was because of your initiative and others that concept developed and was finally accepted by the Federal Government. I wasn't dogmatic on November 8th when I woke up to hear that the Federal Government had announced that the funding for that centre was terminated. That was done without any consultation whatsoever with the Provincial Government. In fact, shortly after the election of the new Federal Government, I had written to all of the five Min isters that I interface with as a Provincial Min ister.

I wrote to all five Federal Min isters and quite quickly was able to arrange meetings with all of them except one. I was able to meet with every Federal Government Mini ster except one in Ottawa and had good opening discussions on the problems that I saw in the Province of Manitoba as they reflected on the federal scene with the Industry Min ister, the Minister of Trade, the Mini ster of Culture, and the Secretary of State respo nsi ble for Multiculturalism. The one Mini ster I could not see was the Minister of Science and Technol ogy. He wasn't able or wasn't available to meet with me.

I had no discussion with him. lt wasn't until after the announcement was made that he came to Winnipeg a week later to meet and to consult with me after the decision had been made.

His words to me at that meeting were that if the Province of Manitoba is willing to put money on the table to fund that centre, then we will be able to find some money to fund it. lt would not be at the $20 million level, but if the Province of Manitoba is willing to put $3 million or $4 million of direct operating costs into that building, then the Federal Government would be willing to do the same thing. lt was after our reaction to that proposal that we were able to develop the concept of getting into a rent situation to help develop it.

So it certainly wasn't a dogmatic attitude on behalf of the Provincial Government. We are committed to that centre. it's moved from a Federal Government commitment of $20 million to something significantly less. While we're concerned that may mean less activity in the Province of Manitoba in areas related to technological development, we fully recognize that a new Federal Go vernment wishes to decrease the national deficit and is finding ways to do that. But we're not going to accept it being done in a way that is going to offload those costs onto the Province of Manitoba.

We also recognize that there is a need to better formali ze the involvement of the private sector in that centre, and we were supportive of any movement in that regard. That's certainly the way that the two provincial technology centres operate at the present time, with significant and growing involvement and di rect financial support through the fee-for-service concept, direct financial support from the private sector. We're not opposed to that; that's what we want. But I have difficulty in understanding how we are going to be able to formal ize all of the private sector support.

Sure, there may be some larger companies that are willing to put money into the centre to make some commitments, but the member knows full well that the small manufacturing sector, which is critical to Manitoba's economy, is not in a position to make formal commitments of money to that centre.

They will participate and will get involved in activities of the centre that can benefit their particular operations and we'll be willing to pay for them, but they are not In the situation of the General Motors or the Fords or the other large corporations of this country to put significant upfront money into a centre like that.

That is my concern; that if we continue on the path that the Federal Government is intent on going, to formalize a private sector involvement, that we may miss the mark in terms of the very critical sector that that centre was envisaged to deal with and that is the small manufacturing sector in Canada, in the Prairies, in Manitoba, that need assistance, need some form of central ized assistanc e in order to keep up with technological advancement.

So, far from being dogmatic, we have been flexible given the situation that was caused by the de Cotret statement of November 8th, and nothwithstanding the fact there was no consultation prior to that date that we have been willing to work with and to find a way to make that centre happen. But the province is not going to accept the offload ing of federal costs onto provincial taxpayers. I think that would be irresponsible on the part of this Min ister or any provincial Min ister. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Well, I agree with the Minister, but I go back to what you seem to have been able to arrange is a rent.

You are paying rent now and then having your technology centre with the NRC Centre which would be I think a benefit to all. I don't think the Minister, and I'm not saying that he doesn't have to wait to see it, but he's going to have to wait to see it, that Dr. Wedepohl's report is going to be in any way favouring large companies, he's entirely different.

The large companies will put money in, but they will be putting it in on the basis that the centre will be there for them to be able to use, the same basis, and anybody else pay for it. lt is probably less costly for them to produce, to support, a technology centre with everybody else than it is to build one of their own. I assure you that the smaller manufacturers will still have the benefit of the use of the centre. As a matter of fact, I would suggest that they would even be able to have some use of the centre on the basis of helping them to get going with certain things.

But I must say, we have to wait for the report. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(a)( 1) ? MR. F. JOHNSTON: Do you have any questions on the MR. CHAIRMAN: Pass. 3.(a)(2) ... MR. F. JOHNST ON: Excuse me, I have another question. I might not have had one. Mr. Chairman, we have been doing fine until this jester came along in this commit tee. I would hope that the Minister can control him just a little bit. Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(a)(2)- pass. 3.(b)( 1) Information Technology: Salaries; 3.(b)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, the Minister has announced the Information Technology Centre and Deer 2838

'nlesday, 11 June, 1985 Lodge School and he has announced the - and I may be wrong - is it six companies that are now involved with the centre, computer companies that are involved with the centre? Am I right in six, or what is it now? HON. E. KOSTYRA: There are six that have signed agreements with the government to date. We are expe cting probably two more to formalize the agreements prior to the opening of the centre. MR. F. JOHNSTON: That's eight. Now, the program of the centre is to assist schools and students in computer technology, am I correct in that? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: The centre has a number of functions, one is related to education and that is to provide for a one-stop shopping centre, if I can call it that, for school divisions to look at their needs in the area of computers and the application of that technology for use in the schools. it will also have some of the Education Department staff consultants who work with the school division on computer related programming.

We are also using that to help get the companies, both who are directly involved and others, to look at the development of a cour se where for use in the schools. because that is one area of significant growth in the overall area and one that we think can be exploited for Manitoba. I don't think we have many opportunities in terms of the actual manufacturing of computer outside of those companies that are active here now, becaus e there is considerable activity throughout the world on that, but the area of course where it does provide some opportunities.

We are also looking at other areas, such as office technology and public information technolo gy, to be developed in that centre. So it's got a variety of needs and I think is unique in terms of being able to bring about the private sector or the private companies the needs of the education system and hope fully the development of further indu strial opportunities for Manitoba companies and Manitobans. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: We ll, your budget, $16 5,000, this is for salaries, an increase in salaries, obviously , but the renovations of the building and what have you, Deer Lodge Junior High, that's in another department, is it? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The staff in this division are just the Information Te chnology staff of the department. All of the costs related to the renovations of this centre and the operations of the centre are funded out of the Jobs Fund - the renovat ion costs and the staffing costs.

The total cost I think in the Jobs Fund is somewhat under $2 million for the costs of the centre that are bud geted for this year, the renovations and the costs of operating the centre once it opens later this summ er. The staff here are three staff: a director, a project co-ordinator and a computer programm er. This staff, besides involvement in the centre, is also involved in other areas of information: technology industry in the province, such as working with a company such as . Sperr y, and Burroughs, and also other companies. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Why are the companies coming in?

No company comes walking up and hands this type of money out to participate in something unless there is a benefit to them. I'm trying to find that benefit to them which overflows into a benefit for Manitoba students, busi ness or whatever. I'm not an expert on computers and I might say to the Minister I just live two blocks from this Deer Lodge Junior High and I may go in some day and find the director, I bel ieve, Mr. Gonzale s, is it? - and ask him to explain to me just what is happening, if the Minister doesn't mind, because I'm not knowledgeable on it.

The companies are putting in money, there is something in it for them; that students now would be starting to work on their comput er, they work on it forever, what are we into? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The most direct benefit for the companies is that the y have ... - (Inaudible) - ... from the six companies that are participating, from one of them the purchase of the computer compan y, because the decision with respect to the purcha se of equipment is made by the school division.

Looking at it from a company's perspective, they are part of a shopping mall for comput ers, so the benefit to them from their standpoint hopefully will be increased sales of their products and it's kind of a dominoe effect, that once we are able to get interest from one company and a second company, that the others obviously felt they had to be part of it or else they would be looking from the outside in. So there is a benefit to the companies in terms of, hopefully for them, increased activity in the sale and promotion of their equi pment.

The arrangement is that each company has equal space in the centre and it is being arranged in such a way that nobody is in a prefer ential position. The benefit for the school divisions is that they have one location with which to review the equipment. There's going to be model classrooms there for the use of teachers and the consultants from the Department of Education, to help them in terms of training on the machine ry, on the computer equip ment, and there will also be the opportunity for development of a related cou rse where industries are at the centre.

The member will certainly be welcome to tour the centre. I have to admit that I would be someone who would be classified as computer ill iterate when it comes to th ese kinds of things. So, having said all of that, I come from the same perspective as the member does when it comes to computer information. MR. F. JOHNSTON: We ll, I'm very happy about the information. I can get out of computers In a hu rry, but I absolutely refuse to learn it. I'm getting too old for it. I'll just take the information as it comes.

But there is no question that the sales personnel of the companies that are involved are going to be calling on school boards, and regardless of whether they are going to say, well, now, we've got a place you can go to check out our equi pment, see how you like it, see how it suits you; but the y will also follow up after; they will also try to convince them. If somebody says that I went down there, you suggested that I go down there, the Sperry man, and the person got down there and all of a sudden they liked somebody else's equipment.

If you don't think that the Sperry man is not going to continue to be hardsell and work on his sale, I caution, we're not getting into having a showroom for the sales 2839

TUeeday , 11 June, 1985 personnel. In other words, you have supplied a place where they can go and see it all. Those fellows aren't going to back off trying to sell their equip ment. They could very easi ly. We ll, I'v e said it, I hope it's not going to become a showroom just for these companies. There's got to be some other benefit to us for that, to the province. I know they've put money into it. Now that is the education part of it. Where does it move from there? Does small industry, businesses, have the opportunity to come down and take a look at what might suit their preference? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: That is what we see as development of further phases. Though, at this time, we want to get the first phase operation before we move into the second phase, into the office and public information technology area. We want to get the educational component working, then the next will be the office technol ogy. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Are the companies going to have any staff there in their own areas? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Ye s, they'll each have one staff person there. MR. F. JOHNSTON: So really we'r e looking at expanding it into the benefit for small industry in the Province of Manitoba .

We don't have to worry about the big fellows. They may come down and have a look at it or you may work with some of them from time to time, but they will have their own staffs and do their own studying. it's the small businessman that doesn't have the advisory capacity within his own organization that can have the benefit. But, again, I just hope we're not doing a job for the companies that they should be doing themselves. Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(b)(1) -p ass; 3.(b)(2)-pa ss. 3.(

c) Grant Assistance - Manitoba Research Council: - the Member for Portage. MR. L. HYDE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question for the Minister . Could he provide me with information as to what new project or pilot project is in store for the Portage Food Centre? HON. E. KO STYRA: I really can't provide th at Information for him because the projects that the Food Products Centre involves itself in are on the basis of contracts with various companies. So it depends on what the needs are of the compani es and that determines the projects they are involved in.

But obviously they are continuing to have greater utili zation by the private sector. I'm just looking for the figures here. The total fee for service income for the Food Products Centre is over $490,000 for this next year, which is a 10 .6 percent increase over last year which means that there is that much more increased activity from the private sector.

The member is also aware that there was recen tly an expansion comp leted to the centre which was funded through the Jobs Fund for a cost of $1 million - partially funded under the Jobs Fund - and that increased capacity provides for increased freezer and food storage capaci ty, an enlar ged dry mix processing and shipping area, and provisions for a meat inspector's office. But I really can't tell him the specific projects that are ongoing because they are all done through individual contracts with companies or other individuals. MR. L. HYDE: Mr.

Chairman, I wonder if the Minister could indicate to me just how successful was the most recent project that they had on the production of that new French cheese. Has it proven to be successfu l? HON. E. KOSTYRA: I guess it was successful to the point that the person has moved to Queb ec and has established a company in Quebec for the production of the cheese, because he felt there was a larger market for his product in Quebec rather than in Manitoba. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: I think this figure was given to us last year but I wonder , what is the ratio now of Income versus the costs as far as the two technology centres are concerned? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The Provincial Government grant is $3.1 million out of total operat ing costs of $6.7 million. So that works out to about 55 percent private sector against 45 percent being supported by provincial appropriation. MR. F. JOHNSTON: That's the two of them? HON. E. KOSTYRA: The two of them combined. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Is one doing better than the other? Or are they both running around 50 percent? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: The Industrial Te chnology Centre has a greater involvement on the fee for service at approxima tely 60 percent; the Food Products Centre is less than 50 percent; and the growth in terms of the private sector has been more dramatic at the Industrial Te chnology Centr e tha n at the Food Products Dev elopment Centre. MR. F. JOHNS TON: The expansion of the Food Tec hnology Centre that took place, did that put us in the position of having probably one of the better food technology centres in Canada, or certainly We stern Canada I believe? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: I think it's a good centre, but Ontario has recently built a brand new centre that is considerably larger than ours and I'd imagine it's as advanced, if not more advanced than what our centre is because it was just built and opened in the last short while. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Do both centres have their own boards, like the Food Products Development Centr e have a board and the Indu strial Te chnolo gy Centre, do they have separate boards? HON. E. KOSTYRA: There has been some rest ructuring as a result of the changes vis-a-vis the Rese arch Council 2840

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 and the department, and due to the fact that the Federal-Provincial arrangement concluded and now the province is totally responsible for the centre. And what the Research Council has put in place is a Board of Directors for the technical centres which is made up of members of the Manitoba Research Council itself to be the Board of Directors for the technical centres. They each then have advisory comm ittees from the private sector to that technical centre's Board of Directors.

So the advisory committ ees are in place, though they are in a somewhat different form than they were under the Federal-Provincial Agreement. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, it's not that much difference. I remember last year relating the problems to the Minister that did develop and can develop. Your advisory comm ittees are people who are knowledgeable about, in the case of the Foods Centre in the food business.

In the other centre they're usually electrical and mechanical, etc., and they have a knowledge of the business in the centre and they're very close to it and they have, in most cases, a very practical knowledge and good business knowledge of what should be done. But you still have a board sitting over the top of them there that if they make suggestions and the other board doesn't like them, they can toss them out, as I see it.

As I mentioned last year, I had probably the best Food Advisory Committ ee that I thought I could get in the Province of Manitoba and they all walked in one day and quit because they said, you know there's no sense of us being there and making recommendations and doing the things we know have to be done to make our industry better and having somebody up above that doesn't know a doughnut from a mushroom tell us what to do. I just hope that situation has been solved. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Well, I haven't seen any specific situations come to my attention outside of one I think, a concern about where there was a potential overlap between what was available thr ough the pri vate consulting industry and our lab.

I think they're working reasonably well at the present time with the advisory commit tee structure and I am sure that if there are specific issues or if they start not heeding the advice of the advisory commit tee or not being receptive to the needs of the private sector, then I am sure as in any other area of government activity, that it would be quickly brought to my attention or to the general public's attention.

I think the fact that centres continue to grow in terms of the private sector involvement, I think is a sign that they are keeping in touch with the needs of the private sector; they're not too far off the mark. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Are we getting any business from out-of-province, from the west or Lakehead area for the technology centres? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes, there are some contracts that come from outside of the province. We don't have any detail on them. MR. F. JOHNSTON: And the computer centre, this is the other computer centre that was in the Industrial Computer Centre, is that it that's in there? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: CAD/CAM. it's part of the Industrial Technology Centre. MR. F. JOHNSTON: CAD/C AM. Your department doesn't have anything to do with all the small areas of space that they rent out there for businesses to start up; that's under business development? HON. E. KOSTYRA: No, we have an involvement through our Technology Commerciali zation Program , a subsidy is provided for people to move under the Technology Commercialization Program. MR. F. JOHNSTON: In other words, they'd move in there at a low rent if they have a new product or something that they're developing. Are they all full at the present time? HON.

E. KOSTYRA: There are 13 companies in there right now, and there is one bay that is empty. The one bay could conceivably take a numb er of companies, if need be, because it can be subdivided. MR. F. JOHNSTON : The comp anie s are basically working on new products, new techno logy, industrial development, that's the type of people that are involved in there, are they? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(c)- pass.

Resolution 105: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,644,900 for Industry, Trade and Technology, Technology Division, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1986- Pass. Item No. 4., Cana d a-Manitoba Economic Development Planning Agreement - the Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, I have seen the Economic Development Planning Agreement, but the agre ement encom passes ma ny th in gs, many departments. I know the Minister is involved in the one in communications, and there is the forest, which is in resources, I would imagine.

Or what is this $10 0,000 for in this one? HON. E. KOSTY RA: This is actually part of an expenditur e level of $500,000 because the other $400,000 is in the Enabling Vote, 26.(

h) on Page 135. I think the member knows that under the Enabling Vote some of the money is put in the respective department, the rest is put into the Enabling Vote. The $500,000 is the provincial planning portion of the ERDA agreement and is a

section that allows for studies to be done - joint federal-provincial studies - on specific areas that ERDA Min isters, both provincial and federal, wish to have researched. There are some transportation studies related to mar kets for products supported under the ERD A agreement such as the lightweight hopper car. Some of the studies that will be undertaken in the health care industries, related to the health care initiative, would come under this. We have recently done a study on a concept of a teleport for Manitoba. But that's what it is. lt's a vehicle for overall joint federal-provincial economic studies under the broader ERDA area. 2841

TUesday, 11 June, 1985 MR. CHAIRMAN: No. 4- pass. Resolution 106: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $10 0,000 for Indust ry, Trade and Te chnol ogy, Canada-M anitoba Economic Development Planning Agreement, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 86-pass. Back to the Minister's Salary, Item No. 1.(a) - the Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Well, Mr. Chairman, I have always said that this Minister knows his department. I don't have reservations about that at the present time, but I have some concerns.

If the Minister would take Hansard in the next few days, if he has time, to read over the discussions on the department in the last two days, I think he will find that most of his answers were relating to something is going to happen. Quite frank ly, his opening remarks, when he refers to the 5.6 real output expanded in the Province of Manitoba compa red to 4. 7 in Canada, I have had some people try to find where that figure came from because, boy, that's high.

So I have menti oned previously that there seemed to be a reaching, and this is the 12 ,000 jobs, the 2.4 increase in jobs in the last year , but we still have une mployment The Minister , where he says in his remarks here that, "after a previous period of relativ e neglect in decline," I can only say that if he was refer ring to the previous government regarding neglect in decline, I think he is wrong because there were far more activities happening within the department as far as industrial development was concerned than we are seeing in the last four years.

I know that these pertain to DREE grants, but they were all people who wanted to come to Manitoba and expand in Manitoba and we were a DREE area, and there were other DREE areas. But we had a list of continuing companies that were developing and opening within the Province of Manitoba. We don't seem to be seeing that list any more and we don't seem to be seeing an aggressive group of people who are going out and chasing up busi ness the way it used to happen.

I don't want to refer to the report that was left in my desk by the previous government when I came in that was presented to him, that had told the previous Minister - I believe Mr. Evans at the time - that had told him that manufacturing and investment had gone down in Manitoba from '75 to '77 drastically and it was probably at the lowest ebb it had been for years. That report wasn't made for me; it was made for Mr. Evans and I have tabled part of it in the Legislature.

We started to move along with investment and moving up in manufacturing within the Province of Manitoba , and now every thing seems to have been in a bit of a standstill or very much of a stands till in the last four years. Last year , the Minister said the initiatives they were putting forward, that this many things were going to happen. I ask him to take a look at Hansard and his answers today and in the last two days have been on the basis of something is going to happen again. Nothing has really been happening in the Province of Manitoba as far as investment is concerned.

I know that the Minister will give me figures, saying that we are going to have the highe st investment and what have you, but you have to take the public investment out of that. You have to take a look at how much commmercialism as far as apartment blocks and things like that are concerned because there is a shortage of apartment blocks and there will be some investment in that area. But the actual investment in manufacturing is not moving in Manitoba the way it should be. The Minister says that we are working on it but, you know, we can't keep working on this forever.

Our job creat ion is not moving up as fast as other provinces, and we have brought that up in the Hous e. Our situation where the other provinces are gradually moving out of the recession period, as this government likes to call it, and use figures, saying prereces sion, etc., are not looking as rosy as some of the other provinces because when they start to move, unless Manitoba is moving with them, we are going to be on the outside looking in. We're going to be at a bit of a crossroad and, if we don't take the right road, we're going to have a lot of problems.

So I can only say that the situation is not looking good at the present time from the point of view of investment in Manitoba. He's got some dis couraging things. lt amazes me, the Minister of Development and Small Business gives us his opinion of the payroll tax, and I'm sure that you'll defend the payroll tax; he mentions that he was out talking to people in busi nesses throughout the province about the payroll tax and he said that they seemed to accept the explanation. One fellow said to me: do you know that there's a Minister in this province that defends and likes the payroll tax?

I said, well I guess there are some, they brought it in. He added, I haven't had a lecture like that since I left university. So, Mr. Chairman, the situation that we have, looking at these things through rose-coloured gl asses and taking the figures that you want, the ones that you like, and saying, yes, everyt hing is fine, is not the right way to be looking at it, because it's not good out there. 1t is not forecast to be as good as the government would like to think it is. Even if we take half of the forecasts that are good, we've got some half that are bad. You can't take all the good forecasts.

I assure you that situation seems to be what is happening with the government. We mentioned the situation of the labour legislation and I can assure you it does concern small businessmen that they can be organ ized as fast as they can be. The one person who said to me - and I must agree with him - I would invite all of you, because if you're going to invest in business and you have the choice of putting your busi ness where there isn't the payroll tax versus where there is a payroll tax, what would you do?

If you had labour legislation that you felt was unfair - I'm not saying you feel it's unfair, but if you felt it was unfair - versus other areas, what would you do? The busi ness atmosphere, as we heard from the Vice President of Pratt and Whit ney , said Nova Scotia has a record of a good atmosphere for busi ness - I think he put it very diploma tically. But what would you do if you had a payroll of approximately $25 million to $30 million and you had to pay a payroll tax on it every year? That's about $400,000 or $500,000.00.

Do you know that in 10 years he's got $5 million worth of expens e that he wouldn't have in any other province? In 20 years, do you know 2842

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 what that is? That's almost 20 million or so expense, more expense than he has in any other . . . and you want them here for that long. Do you mean to tell me that the big companies that provide long-term, steady, good-paying jobs . . . I'm going to finish, Mr. Chairman, very quick ly. If the Mi nister wants to answer, I have no objections because I think we can finish this tonight. Those long-term, good-paying jobs with those big payrolls, do you mean to tell me the board of directors sit down and ignores $500,000 extra expense a year? I submit, Mr. Chairman, they don't.

That is one of the reasons why it's not looking that good for the Province of Manitoba, regardless of how hard the Min ister works or how good his direction is to his staff. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (a)(1 )-pass. Resolution 103: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,704,000 for Industry, Tr ade and Technolo gy, Adminis tration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 86- pass. The hour being 4:30 p.m., we are proceeding to Private Members' Hour. The commit tee shall return at 8:00 p.m. this evening. SUPPLY - EDUCATION MR. CHAIRMAN, P.

Eyler: We are considering the Estima tes of the Department of Education, Item 2.(

a) t eachers' Retirement Allowance Fund and Operational Support Services - the Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, when we comple ted last evening, the Mi nister undertook to provide for me the latest profile of teaching agents within the Province of Manitoba. I'm wondering if she can provide that to me at this time. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mini ster of Education. HON. M. HEM PHILL: Mr. Chairman, I was hoping to be able to provide that to the member today, and I expected to be able to do so.

However, one of the points I made the other day is that we might be talking from different statistics or with different analysis. When we looked at the two pieces of information, we found that was so. I believe the Mem ber for Morris had gained from the Teachers' Society data and information on teachers that belong to TRAF. When I was doing my quotes, I was talking about the entire teacher population and I was quoted from the existing list this year, and his were'83.

So it actually took us, I think, until late this morning before we got the paper from MAST that he was quoting from and we have not been able to reconcile the two different statistics that we were both speaking from, which I suspected might be the case. But as soon as we have it, I'll give it to him. MR. C. MANNESS: Could the Mi nister tell me then how many people actively teaching in the Province of · Manitoba do not make contributions to that fund? HON. M. HEMPHILL: I think they all make contributions. MR. C. MANNESS: Well, Mr. Chairman, that was my point.

The Minister indicated in her comments just a few moments ago that part of the difference in the base of statistics was that I used a source from the Teachers' Society and she was using as her source, pension based statistics. So I'll wait anyway until I receive from her the material the she has indicated she will send to me. I would ask the Minister, what other provinces in Canada ha ve retirement without penalty pension regulations within their responsibility? HON. M. HEMPHILL: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. I was asking for a bit of order at the time that the question was being posed.

I was having great difficulty hearing and, in fact, I still am. If you could ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Orde r ple ase , order please. If honourable members wish to have extra conversations outside of the committee hearings, I'm sure there is plenty of room in the hall to accommodate them. The Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, I asked the Minister whether or not, if Bill 26 passes, Manitoba will be the first province in Canada to be able to offer to its teaching population retirement without penalty at the age of 55. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr.

Chairman, I believe the other provinces have early retirement but with the penalty. So we are, once again, leading the way in pension reform. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, is it a fact that the Province of Alberta, the earliest age there can be retirement without penalty is age 65, 65 in Saskatchewan, 65 in Ontario, 65 in Quebec, 65 in New Brunswick, 60 in Nova Scotia, 60 in Prince Edward Island, 60 in Newfoundland? Are those figures correct? HON. M. HEM PHILL: Mr. Chairman, I believe that it's possible to retire early in other provinces, but there is a service requirement. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Chairman, I have before me a docume nt prepared by the Canadia n Teachers' Federation, September, 1984 and it's titled: "Some Major Features of Teacher Retirement Plans in Canada." I look at Table A, "B enefit Levels," and I go to the fourth column over and it's headed, "R etirement without pena lty, Earlie st Age (with mi nimu m service). " I understand the minimum service today in Manitoba is 10 years.

So the earliest age one can retire that's qualified without penalty is: - and I listed the num bers, British Columbia, 60; Alberta, 65; Saskatchewan, 65; Ontario, 65; Quebec, 65; New Brunswick, 65; Nova Scotia, 60; PEI, 60; and Newfoundland, 60 - I'm wondering whether the Minister can indicate whether this information that I have provided to her is either outdated or incorrect. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Mr. Chairman, I don't have the document in front of me, and it's a little difficult to absorb all that detail. First of all, we can do that if he wishes, but let's even assume that it's correct. I have 2843

Tueadey. 11 June, 1885 no prob lems assuming that the document that he has in front of him is either a correct one or a very recent one. I also have no problems with having Manitoba be a leading light in pension reform, as they were last year when we brought in The Pension Benefit Act for the people of Manitoba. This is one more step and I suppose there are many others. When we brought this In, we said that it was the second time the government had negotiated the removal of the early penal ty. lt has been reduced with the MGEA.

At the time I said that clearly , early retirement for people who want to retire and, in many cases should retire, teachers or non-teachers, who are working in their professions and perhaps should not be any longer for a numb er of reasons or do not want to, but early retirement is one of the keys to employment and we really believe that. it's one of the keys to opening up jobs to our young teachers and young people, not just In the field of education but where the economy is down and where there is not a lot of mobility and not a lot of openings for young people and we know that's going to stay that way for a while.

Clea rly, this is one of the things that suits eve rybody, benefits the system, benefits the people that are retiring, and benefits the young people that are getting jobs. I and my government make no apologies for bringing in this progressive piece of legislation. As I said when I introduced it, I hope that other emplo yers will negotiate as good a deal as we did and follow suit to open up more jobs for more young people in more fields. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, using the Minister's explanation and her analogy, why then doesn't she drop the age to 45?

If she's not concerned about the cost, why not drop it to 45, then we could provide employment for everybody who gradua tes for the next numb er of years? I mean, using her argument. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Ye s, Mr. Chairman, I have a concern. I am advised by the Minister that in my absence last night there was some debate on the subject matter of a bill which is currently before the House during these Estimates.

I recognize that the bill and the Estima tes are distinctly related, but our rules are specifically designed that debate takes place at one opportunity, and the debate on the principle of the bill is provided for in second read ing; debate on the detail and claus e-by-clause of the bill is provided at committee. The impact of the bill with regard to long-term forecast of funding requirements under TRAF is one thing which will come out in the Committee Stage on the bill.

To suggest that that debate should take place now in Estimates on the monies that are provided for the operation of the fund this year , I think, is entir ely inap propriate and I would caution members, Mr. Chairman, not to break our rules with regard to the provision for debate to be focussed at one opportunity. Otherwise, Sir, we could be debating all legislation in the appropria te Estimates and, Sir, that would violate all of our rules and all of the precedents established. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Memb er for Morris to the same point of order. MR. C. MANNESS: To the same point of order, Mr.

Chairman, I'm asking general questions assoc iated with a line estimate within the appropriations, the Main Estima tes of Expenditure for the Province of Manitoba this year. Mr. Chairman, I asked many of the same questions a year ago and, just because Bill 26 happens to be on the table of this Legislature, I should not be precluded from asking the very same general questions that I would have posed a year ago, that I might to intend to pose another year. So, Mr.

Chairman, I'm not attempting to address Bill 26, what I'm attempting to do is to talk specifically about concerns related to Appropriation No. 48, Te achers' Retirement Allowances Fund and Operational Support Services, and every one of my questions have been directed toward the $19 million, or how that number is going to increase in the future. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Government House Leader to the same point. HON. A. ANSTETT: Ye s, Mr. Chairman, the Member for Morris makes my point.

The fact of the matter is that he is quite correct in his assumption, although he rejects it, that because a bill has been introduced - and the Clerk I am sure can find the Chairman the appropriate citation, I don't have it handy - a bill takes precedence in terms of discussion. The fact that there was not a bill there last year meant that that discussion could take place in Estimates. The fact that there is a bill there. bills take precedence over resolutions and over Estima tes, and that is the focal point for that di scuss ion. I recog nize, Mr .

Chairman, that there will be a fine line and I am sure the member will want to stay on the appropriate side of it, between the discussion of the Estima tes and the discussion of the bill, and I was only cautioning that that line exists, and the introduction of the bill makes it very clear where each pertinent part of the discussion should take place. But we should not be involved in a detailed discussion of the impact of the legislation on the fund during the Estimates.

The bill has not been passed and that is not an appropriate discussion at this point. lt would be an appropria te discussion if the bill had been enacted and we were then considering the Estimates. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Virden to the same point. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. To the same point of order. Mr. Chairman, I don't know how many times we have heard in this Assembly reference made, when we're dealing with legislation or reso lutions, they say the appropriate place to ask questions is when this matter comes before committee dealing with Estimates.

This is the time when questions should be asked and answers should be given. lt is tremendous ly important, Mr. Chairman, that we are able to get answers to questions, and this is the place when you 're dealing with the detailed Estimates of the department, when we can get answers to questions. 2844

�y, 11 June, 1� Mr. Chairman, you recognize that, when you're in debate on second reading on a bill, you cannot ask questions; you can only debate the principle of the bill, and that is so fundamentally important in our rules. lt precludes questions being asked when you're in debate on second reading of a bill, so the only place that you can ask questions, and where you should ask questions, and where you should get answers is when you're dealing with the Estim ates of the department. That is the place where you get the opportunity to ask the questions. The unfortunate

part is that the Mi nister hasn't done her homework and isn't prepared to answer the questions. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Opposition House Leader to the same point. MR. H. ENNS: Just further to the same argument, I raise two specific matters for your consideration, Mr. Chairman. First of all, let's understand what the description of Res olution 48 is; consists of the gov ernment's contribution to the Teachers' Retirement Allowance Fund. Mr .

Chairman, as the Memb er for Mo rris indicates, this is an item that's before us as long as the government has contributed to Teachers' Allowance Retirement Fund and will continue to be before us. Bills being introduced, or not bills being introduced, is a very legitimate item of consideration by this committee. lt states very clearly in the description of Resolution 48 "consists of the government's contribution to the Teachers' Retirement Allowance Fund." Now, Mr.

Chairman, the further matter - and I'm just asking the advice from the Clerk - we, at great length, the member may not have been present, debated the activitie s of the Ma nitoba Agric ultu ral Credit Corporat ion. We ha ve, in the same Ses sion, Mr. Chairman, Bill No. 7,

An Act to amend The Agricultural Credit Corporation before usk. No fair-mi nded Chairman, Mr. Chairman, interrupted the proceedings. I will tell you, we are not debating the details of a bill, as understood legislativ ely, details of bill as clause-by clause considera tion; we are talking about the impact, the intent, the cost impli cations to the general public, and that, Mr. Chairman, is what the consideration of Estima tes is all about. This is, after all, a fundamental role to consider how the money is being spent, Mr. Chairman. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Chairman, I would not have intervened, again, if it were not for the comments of the Opposition House Leader, but I think he chooses a perfect example. The debate on Bill 7 deals with provisions which have not yet been enacted; potentially will have im pacts on the MACC budget and financing; and that bill had not been enacted and was not discussed in detail in the MACC Estima tes. Now, Mr. Chairman, ... MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. HON. A. ANSTETT: That's what I'm speaking to. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. A point of order cannot be raised on a point of order. The Government House Leader. HON. A.

AN STETT: Mr. Chairman, th e Mini ster ob viously is prepared, cont rary to the spurious suggestion of the Member of Virden, who as a former Speaker should know better, to add ress all these questions, has been doing so both last night and again tod ay. However, in the debate which was occurring in this Chamber before the point of order was raised, the Member for Morris suggested that the age limit and in jest, as part of the debate I take it, should be lowered to 45.

I don't think that was in reference to the Estimates; I believe that conjecture in debate was raised in the context of the bill. - (Interjection) - I listened to the Member for Lakeside, I trust he'll give me the same courtesy. The Member for Morris made a suggestion, both from his seat and in the debate, I trust it'll be recorded in Hansard, in the entertaining of discussion on this item in the Estimates, that the retirement age should be lowered to 45. A MEMBER: Using the Min ister's logic. HON. A. ANSTETT: Well, he may reject or accept the Mi nister's logic, but that's not the ques tion.

The question of the level of the retirement age is the question that's being add ressed in the bill. We are then engaging in debate on the subject matter of the bill. That is, as I agreed earlier, a fine line. I caution members, and that's the line I am drawing and asking the chairman to draw, is that there is a certain subject matter in the bill which only if enacted by this Cham ber then becomes a matter which impacts on Estimates in future years.

If mem bers wish to throw out the rule which allows certain levels of pre-emption so that the debate is not dupl icated, I trust they'll apply that across the board and refer that ma tter to the Ru les Commit tee. Otherwise, Sir, we will have duplic ated debate at every stage of our proceedings on bills and Estimates and resolutions. That's why the rule is there; that's the only reason it's there. The Minister is fully prepared and has been answering questions on the teachers' superannuation fund and whether the member likes the answers, that's a matter for debate.

But bringing· in the subject matter of the principles of the bill is certainly not appropriate. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Morris to the same point. MR. C. MANNESS: The same point of order. Instead of the Government House Leader lecturing me, let him lecture his own colleague, the Mi nister of Education. Mr. Chairman, I asked the question. I asked the Mi nister of Education this question.

I asked her if she had seen a table prepared by the Canadian Teachers' Federation in which there was a column heading, "R etirement without Penalty - Earliest Age." I asked her then to confirm the fact that all provinces in Canada have age levels higher than we do in Manitoba. At that time the Miniser of Education launched off into a tirade saying she was happy that the principle of offering early retirement in the Province of Manitoba represented reform and she was proud of doing it. 2845

Tuesday, 11 June, 1985 Mr. Chairman, I submit that the Minister of Education moved into the topic of Bill 26, not myself. Maybe now I can expect an apology from the Government House Leader with respect to this whole matter . MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Chairman . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Opposition House Leader to the same point. MR. H. ENNS: . . . just so that the Government House Leader ha s some sufficient time to com pose an appropriate apology to my colleague, the Member for Morris, let me remind you, Mr. Chairman, - and Mr.

Chairman, I don't recall, but you, Sir, might well have been in the Chair when I stood in my seat during the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture on the resol ution dealing with the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation and recommended, suggested, made what I thought was a rather eloquent speech about the fact that the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation ought to consider the part-time farmer, the hobby farmer, those who are presently excluded from consideration by the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation. We ll, Mr. Chairman, the Minister responded.

He took occasion to take a few swipes at me by saying that he hoped that there would not have to be any part-time farmers, that everybody ought to be able to make a full-time living in agriculture. But, Mr. Chairman, while he was speaking, Bill 7 had been introduced for a first reading in this Chamber; it has now since received second read ing; and what is the principle and the pu rport of Bill No. 7? lt enab les the Ma nitoba Agricult ural Credit Corporation to extend credit assistance to part-time farmers, Mr. Chairman. Now, Mr.

Chairman, the Honourable Government Hous e Leader by now is smiling, by now that he has been caught off base on this one and by now surely will have the honour to apologize to the Member for Morris. Mr. Chairman, lest he start debating about technicalities of what stage the bill is in - first or second read ing or a bill being distributed - well, then we really know what kind of people we are dealing with opposite. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Government House Leader to the same point. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Chairman, things get more curious and more curious.

The Member for Lakeside knows full well that when the debate of MACC Estimates took place in this Chamber , Bill 7 had not been distri buted and the subject matter of that bill therefore was fair game for debate until the bill was distributed; that's provided for in our rules. And for him to suggest that in the enforcement of the rules i

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-4-67a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 4th hansardpdf 67a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	744ebc1331681998e75ee4e2d9b8ddd329a2c80c

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