Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 43 (30th Legislature, 1st Session)

30-1-43

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LE GISLA TIV E ASSE MBLY OF MANIT OBA 2:3 0 o 'cl ock, Thursday, March 7, 19 74 Openi ng Prayer by Mr. Speaker. INT RODUCTION OF GUESTS 1129 MR. SPEAKE R: Before we proceed I should like to di rect the attent ion of the honourable member s to the galle ry where we have 32 students , Grade 11 standing , of the Pie rre Radisson Sc hool. These students are un de r the di rect ion of Mr. Ste nchuk. Th is school is located in the consti tuency of the Ho nourable Member for Radisson.

We have 30 students of Grade 1 standing - Oh, I'm sorry - Level 1 stand ing of the Red Ri ve r Communi ty College , an Eco nomics Class. These stude nts are unde r the di rect ion of Mrs. Pothie r. Th is school is located in the consti tuency of the Honourabl e Membe r for Logan. We also have 11 students , Grade 7, 8, and 9 standi ng of the Br ooklands Junior Hi gh School. These students are un der the di rect ion of Mr. Morrone . This school is also located in the consti tuency of the Ho nourable Membe r for Logan. And we have 26 students , Grade 5 stand ing of the Victor y School.

These students are unde r the direct ion of Mrs. Wi lder and Mi ss Slipit z. This school is located in the consti tuency of the Ho nourable Member for Seven Oaks , the Mi niste r of Hea lth and Soci al Development. On behalf of all the honourable membe rs I welcome you here today. Presenti ng Peti tions ; Read ing and Recei ving Peti ti ons; Presen ting Reports by Standing and Speci al Committees . The Ho nourable Member for Radi sson. PRESENT ING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITT EES MR . HARRY SHAFRANSKY (Radisson): Mr.

Speake r, I beg to present the first report of the Stand ing Committee on Public Utilit ies and Natural Resources. MR . CLE RK: Your Stand ing Committee on Public ut ilitie s and Natural Resources beg leave to presen t this as their first re port. Your Committee met on Thursday, March 7, 19 74 and appointed Mr. Shafransky as Chairman. Your Committee has examined the Annual Re port of the Manito ba Tele phone System for the fiscal year ended March 31, 19 73.

Your Committee rece ived all informat ion des ired by any membe r of the Committee from the officials of the Manitoba Te lephone System and their staffs with respect to matte rs pertaini ng to the An nual Re port and the busine ss of the Manitoba Te lephone System. The fullest opportunity was acc orded to all member s of the Committee to seek any information des ired . MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Membe r for Radisson. MR . SHAFRANSKY : Mr. Speake r, I move, sec onded by the Ho nourable Member for Crescen twood, that the report of the co mmittee be rece ived. MOTION presented and carried. MR .

SPEAKE R: Mi niste ria l State ments and Tab ling of Re ports ; Noti ces of Motion; In tr oduct ion of Bi lls; Quest ions . The Honourab le Leader of the Opposit ion. ORAL QUESTI ONS lVIR. SIDNEY SPIVAK, Q. C. (Leade r of the Official Opposition) (Rive r Hei ghts): Mr. Speake r, my quest ion is to the Mi niste r of Heal th, the Mi nister in charge of Housing . Some ti me ago I asked him a quest ion about the relati onship between the Mani toba Hous ing Renewal Corporation and The Pas Meti s Development Corporation. I wonder if he 1s in a posit ion to answer the quest ion in the House . MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi niste r of Heal th. HON. SAUL A. MILLER (Ministe r of Heal th and Social Development) (Seven Oaks): Mr. Speaker, I' ve made inqu iries from the department on that; I haven 't had a reply. I 'll chase it up. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Membe r for Brandon West.

113 0 March 7, 19 74 CORRE CTION - VO TES AND PROCE EDINGS MR . EDWARD McGILL (Brandon We st) : Mr. Speaker , on a matter of privilege I wonder if I mi ght have leave of the House to make a corre cti on in a wri tten question submitted in Vo tes and Proc eedings No . 24. In the first line of the questions it re ads : How many persons are employed by the Department of Education, that should re ad: the Departm ent of Colleges and Un ivers it ies Affairs. I wonder if I would have leave to make that corre ction. MR . SPE AKER: The honourable member have leave? (Agreed) OR AL QUESTI ONS Cont•d MR .

SPE AKER: The Honourable Le ader of the Li be ral Party. MR . I .H . ASPER (Leader of the Li beral Party) (Wolseley) : My question 's to the Mi niste r re sponsible for the Mani toba Development Corporati on. Is he now in a posi ti on today in view of statements he made to the me dia yesterday to confirm to the Hous e how much more than the $600, 000 that was shown in the MDC re port has been advanced to Wi lliam Clare (Manitob a) .

Bas icall y the question is: Does the additio nal $650, 000 referred to in the Mani toba Gazette of October 27th refer to addit ional loans , making a total of $1, 250, 000, and if that's the cas e, would he please explain what has be en done wi th the money in the company which has found it necess ary to close its doors and have a part- ti me girl answer the phone. MR . SPE AKER: Or der please.

May I indic ate that I have no objecti on to members asking questions but I be lieve one of the procedures is that a quest ion, oral or written, should not conta in an expression of opini on, and that's what makes it fall into the category of be comi ng argumentative. If members would cre ate questi ons which are te rse and to the point it would help the Chair very much . The Honourable Mi nist er of Mi nes . HON . SIDNE Y GREEN , Q. C. (Mi niste r of Mi nes , Resource s and En vironmental Management) (Inkster) : Mr.

Speaker, I regret that the question is so phrase d as to indi cate that certai n things have happened which did not happen. The honourable member starts hi s question by saying , in view of statements that I made to the media yesterday. Mr. · Speaker, a member of the me dia asked me where he could get the informat ion re lative to advance s made to a corporati on, where it was publicly re ported.

I took hi m to the library; wi th a secre tary there they tried to find the information; I came back a few mi nut es later and he lped them find the information and point ed out the porti on of the Man itoba Gazette where the additi onal loan was referred to . Th e honourable member asks whether this is additi onal money. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that he read the Gazette be caus e the fact is , Mr.

Speaker , the amounts up to March 31st are re ported in the statement of the Mani toba Development Corporation; amounts after March 31 st would be found in re ports from the Gazette, unless the period of re port ing has not yet arr ived. Wi th regard to what was done with the money and the closing of doors, I am not aware as to the phys ical status of the door before the advanc ement of the mone y or after the advancement of the mone y.

I am aware that the Mani toba Development Corporati on in approximately July or August of 19 73 re commended that the further advance of $650, 000 was the most logical way of attempting to recover the moneys that had be en previous ly advanced to this publisher. And on that bas is, give n their judgments and the cons ent thereto of the governm ent , they proceeded to make the addit ional advanc es. MR . SPE AKER: The Hon ourable Le ader of the Li beral Party . MR . ASPER: To the same Mi niste r, Mr. Speaker, a supplementary .

Will he confirm that in the perio d followi ng the re port of the MDC and the advanci ng of the addit ional $625 , 000 or concurr ent ther ewith, the public of Manitoba through the MDC be came the owner of 80 percent of Wi lliam Clare (Mani toba) Li mi ted? MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I answered yester day that in the additi ona l financ ing that the Board of Directors of the Fund re commended and proc eeded to act in the best free ent er pris e tra diti on of putti ng themselves in as favorable positi on as they could with respect to that advance.

I am not able to say at this moment the exact perce ntage but I be lieve that they took greater equi ty in the company si nce they were taking a much gre ater share of the risk than is norma l. MR . AS PER: Wi ll the Ministe r confirm to the House or indi cate whether he has be en advised by Mr . Wi lliam Clare of Vancouver , the Pre sident of the Company , that the company does not expect to show any profit before 19 81 , seven years from now?

March 7, 1974 1131 OR AL QUESTIONS MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I have not be en so advised by Mr.

Clare but I am aware that the nature of the re lationship between the fund and the company is such that Rand McNally, be ing a major publishing house in the Uni ted State s , is using the material published by this publisher which will then re sult in a royalty to Wi lliam Clare which the Mani toba Go vernme nt will be a re ci pient , and that in the judgment of the board of di re ctors of the Manitoba Develop ment Corporati on, whose judgem ent I have come to res pect far more than I respect the judgment of the Le ader of the Li beral Party , that was the most sati sfactory way of prot ecti ng the int erests of the province.

MR . SPEAK ER: The Honourable Le ader of the Oppositi on, MR . SPIV AK: Mr. Speaker, my questi on is to the Mi niste r of Co-o perative Development, I wonder if he can ind icate to the House whether there has be en any fraudulent or mi sus e of Go vernment of Mani toba funds or Federa l Go vernment funds by any fishing co-o perative in the Provinc e of Mani toba? MR . SPEAKER : The Hon ourable Minist er of Agri cultur e. HON . SAMUEL USKIW (Minister of Agri culture) (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I have not determ ined that ther e has or has not be en. When I do I will advis e the honourable member. MR .

SPIV AK: Yes, Mr. Speaker , I wonder if the Mi niste r - present another question to the Mini ster. I wonder if he can ind icat e whether there has be en me etings of hi s department with the head of the Fr eshwater Fi sh Marketing Board or Corporation, its officials , with the Departm ent of Indi an Affairs , dealing wi th allegations of misman agement and incompetenc e by the Department of Co-o perative Development in its assistance and supervision of fishing co-o perat ives in northern Mani toba ? MR . USKIW: We ll, Mr.

Speaker , the member alleges mi smanagement in a number of co-operatives or one or more and, Mr. Speaker , that is qui te possible. That is a situati on whieh can arise at any time, and of course does from ti me to ti me. We have had a great deal of experience departmentally in tryi ng to deal with these new co-o peratives who, by th e way, have no way of knowing how to begi n to operate as a corporate body. So it wouldn't be surpri sing to me, Mr. Speaker, if there were problems.

That •s something that we have had from day one, and I•m sure members opposi te had to deal with those problems when they were the government. So , you know, I 'm not sure the extent of the problem. I 'm sure th ere are problems. MR . SPIV AK: Another question to the Mi nist er.

I wonder if the Minist er can ind icate whether he has re c ei ved a re port of a meet ing held on Se ptember 1st of 1973 between the offices of the Fr eshwater Fi sh Marketing Board and the Departm ent of Indian Affairs and the Department of Co-operative Development, dea ling with charges and accusati ons of mismanage ment and in competenc e in connection with the operat ion of the Southern In dian Lake Co-o perative, fishing co -operative. MR . US KIW: No , Mr. Speaker, I don 't be lieve that I have rece ived any official report from anyone becaus e no one was commi ssioned to bri ng a re port to me. MR .

SPIV AK: Mr. Speaker, another question to the Mi niste r . I wonder if he can ind icate, whether any offici als of his departm ent brought to hi s att ention allegat ions that advances that were forwarded to one fishing co-o perative were solicited fraudulent ly by members of hi s own department ? MR. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, if that were the cas e then obviously I think it would depend on the findings of a court as to whether any fraudulent practic es oc curred, and I don •t be lieve that I could at all suggest to members opposi te that someone, either in the department or as a board member of any co- operative, acted in that way be cause that would be a most seri ous allegatio n. MR . SPIV AK: The questi on put to the Mi nist er was whether any one had brought allegations to him concern ing a suggesti on of fraudulently be ing invo lved in the mi suse of money.

Now the quest ion to hi m is , di d any one bri ng hi m allegations , not whether it was true or not , MR . USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I don 't recall of anyone bri ngi ng such allegations to my att ent ion. MR . SPEAK ER: The Honourab le Member for Lakeside, MR . HARRY J. ENNS (Lakeside) : Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the same Mi niste r. Can the Mi nist er ind icate to me why the department al lowed the expenditure s at Southern

1132 March 7, 1974 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. HARRY J. ENNS cont'd) ••.•• Indian Lake Co-operative to be so far out of line with the actual physical properties there being constructed? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: Well, Mr. Speaker, again the Member for Lakeside should know that the local board of South Indian L'ake is autonomous from government other than the government is assisting in the management advice and so on, as we do with all co-operatives, especially the new co-operatives; so it is not a departmental management function, Mr.

Chairman, but rather a private affair of a private corporation. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, the Minister need not lecture me on the responsibilities of the •.• MR . SPEAKER: Question please. MR . ENNS: My question is: Why>bis department approved of the construction of, for instance, a 25, 000-dollar cedar for a log house at Southern Indian Lake surrounded with a 10, 000-dollar fence in that same complex, and why his department approved of those kind of expenditures of public funds? MR . USK IW: Well, Mr.

Chairman, again the honourable member is alluding to something that I know nothing about in that the South Indian Lake Fishery is a private corporation, it is not a departmental organization, so I think my honourable friend should know that we are not in control of private companies. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I direct a final supplementary question to the same Minister. Can the Minister indicate why the department allowed the original projected proposals for Southern Indian Lake, estimated to be in the neighborhood of 200, 000, to exceed a million dollars, I believe the actual cost being a millior four? MR .

USKIW: Mr. Speaker, the department is not in a position to allow or not to allow the formation of a private company, and what that company may or may not do. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I think the question should not be put in the way that my honourable friend puts it. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Assiniboia. MR. STEVE PATRICK (Assiniboia): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Mines and Natural Resour,Jes responsible for MDC. Can the Minister report to the House is the Misawa Homes plant at Gimli still closed? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR . GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, on several occasions I indicated to the honourable member that I would want to answer his questions concerning that establishment if be would put them properly and not make implications which I have already indicated the status of, MR . PATRICK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Has Misawa Homes been given approximately a half a million dollars additional loan since the time that it has been closed? MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I really want to answer the honourable member, and when he puts his question in a form in which it can be accepted I will answer it. MR . PATRICK: A supplementary, Mr.

Speaker: Was the additional loan to Misawa directed by the Minister over objections of the Board of Directors of MDC? MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, the loans that were made from the Manitoba Development Corporation relative to Misawa Homes were recommended by the Board of Directors and accepted by the government. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR . DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): Mr.

Speaker, I direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture regarding the Department of Co-operative Development, Is it true that the Dep artment of Co-operative Development is certifying financial statements from fishing co-ops but it is impossible to reconstruct any of the accounts? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, I think if the honourable member wants a particular piece of information, what he should do is submit a question with a particular situation so I can do a research job, but my honourable friend is generalizing in such a way that I would have to scan the whole of the northern part of Manitoba to find out what he wants to know. MR . CRAIK: Mr. Speaker� I'll reduce the question then to one, of asking the Minister whether or not his department is not certifying the financial statements? MR . USKIW: Mr. Speaker, the department is involved in giving management advice and

March 7, 1974 1133 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. USKIW cont'd) •..•• indeed auditing services. Now if the honourable friend has a particular co-operative in question, I'd be happy to research it for him and give him an answer. MR. CRAIK: A supplementary question then. I ask specifically whether he is not super vising the accounts, the financial . . • certifying the financial statements in the case of South Indian Lake? MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think that now I should indicate to my honourable friend that I will get the information on South Indian Lake for him. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR. J.

WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin): Mr. Speaker, I have a question to the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture. I wonder can the Minister indicate to the House how many of the loans guaranteed by his department for fishing co-ops to the banks and the credit unions are now in arrears? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I don't know how many are currently in arrears.

I know that since ever I've been Minister I was aware of a whole host of them being in arrears at all times; in fact in the first year of office, wrote off at least a half a dozen that were un collectable accounts emanating from many years before. MR . McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, I have another question for the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture. I wonder can the Honourable Minister advise the House how many of the guarantees because of failure to pay interest are now hired and that's authorized by his department? MR. USKIW: I think, Mr. Speaker, that kind of question really requires an Order for Return.

If my honourable friend wishes to submit an Order for Return we'll provide him with the answers. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. J . PAUL MARION (St. Boniface): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I direct my question to the Honourable the Minister for Cultural Affairs. Does the government have any plan to assist the Winnipeg Art Gallery in view of the serious financial difficulties now being faced by the Gallery? · MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tourism and Recreation. HON. RENE E. TOUPIN (Minister of Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs) (Springfield): Well, Mr.

Speaker, the budget for all programs contained within the Department of Tourism, and Recreation and Cultural Affairs will be before this House very soon, and in view of the implication of that budget towards many different organizations that are partially financed through the Department of Tourism and Recreation and Cultural Affairs, I had at least one meeting with the Arts Council, and we are preparing the - how should we say - the ground rules in regards to financing by means of the Arts Council to many organizations that are implicated with that Board given certain responsibilities.

So really I can't, I can1t be more specific at this time until the Estimates of the Department of Tourism and Recreation have passed this House. MR . MARION: Well, this is a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister. Can the Minister confirm or deny that an offer of $100, 000 has been made to the Gallery on a pro tern basis by the province? MR. TOUPIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, knowing that at least in principle some funds will be made available in the upcoming fiscal year starting on the 1st of April, 1974, it is quite possible that we1ve offered to guarantee, bridge financing to a certain extent.

I'm not person ally aware of $100, 000 being the figure, but that is certainly a possibility, that officials of my department have had discussions by means of the Arts Council that this be done. MR. MARION: A supplementary to the same Minister, Mr. Speaker. Is the government ready to accept the report at terms that were offered by the City of Winnipeg whereby they would rebate the $293, 000 in tax arrears and grant $60,000 outright if the province gave this in-term financing of lOO, 000; is the province willing to accept those terms? MR . TOUPIN: Now, Mr.

Speaker, we 're starting to talk turkey, and the province is not in a position, Mr. Speaker, to start negotiating with the City of Winnipeg in regards to what is considered by them to be tax arrears, and what we consider as being a responsibility of the city. There will be certain measures taken at this session, which my honourable member will have a chance to participate.

1134 March 7, 1974 ORAL QUESTIONS MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR . HENRY J. EINARSON (Rock Lake): Mr. Speaker, I direct this to the Minister of Agriculture under his Department of Co-operative Development. Can the Minister indicate why $20,000 was spent on communication equipment and not used, and which was approved and supervised by his department, when we understand $700.0 0 would have been suff ice. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: Well again, Mr.

Speaker, I did indicate to the Member for Riel that I would undertake to find out just what the Department's role is or was with respect to the affairs of South Indian Lake Co-operative. I want to respond to my honourable friend for Rock Lake, for Rock Lake, that the co-operative in question has its own board of directors. MR . EINARSON: I have another question for the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister indicate the amount of arrears of loans which were obtained from the Freshwater Fish Marketing Commission which were assisted and directed by his department, or supervised? MR .

SPEAKER: Order for Return. The Honourable Member for St. James. MR . GEORGE MINAKER (St. James): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister in charge of MDC. I wonder can the Minister confirm that William Clare Limited does not have any manufacturing facilities of its own in Winnipeg and that the film strips which have been produced by the company have been done so under contract with a Toronto firm. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR . GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, that's possible but I don't know - I do know that it is not a requirement of firms receiving money from the Manitoba Development Corporation that they only get work done in the Province of Manitoba. MR . MINAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can the same Minister confirm that the maximum number of Winnipeg-based . . . MR . SPEAKER: Order please. MR . MINAKER: • • • permanent employees with William Clare Company has never exceeded two ? MR . GREEN: No, Mr, Speaker, I cannot be certain about that. I indicated in the House, Mr.

Speaker, when I was asked the other day that this is a firm which has not generated a great deal of employment in the Province of Manitoba. The main reason for the Development Fund's first activity vis-a-vis the firm was in connection with Canadian publishing companies. MR . MINAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Can the same Minister inform the House what criteria is used by the government and MDC in granting of loans to a company, and are the number of jobs that are -- or will be created in the establishment or a permanent manu facturing facility from the granting of loans, are these considered as a major criteria in the granting of loans? MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, all of that information is contained in the guidelines that were arrived at as between the - following discussions between the Manitoba Development Corporation and myself, which guidelines are available to honourable members. ¥It.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West. MR . McGILL: Mr. Speaker, to the Honourable the Minister of Co-operative DeveloP ment. I wonder if the Minister could indicate how much of the $1,300, 000 paid out of the Consolidated Fund under the authority of the Fisheries Act, and loaned by the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation to fishermen and fishing co-operatives, is in arrears at this time? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, I •ll have to take that question as notice because it would require a great deal of research to get all of the facts for my honourable friend. There are, I would presume, hundreds of loans made and therefore it would take a day or two to get that information. MR . McGILL: I wonder if the Minister could indicate whether the government or the Agricultural Credit Corporation has written off any of these loans to the fishermen or the fishing co-operatives? MR . USKIW: Intuitively, Mr.

Speaker, I would think not because the program is relatively new and we normally don•t write off a loan unless it is at least three years or more

March 7, 1974 1135 ORAL QU ESTIONS (MR . USKIW cont•d) ..... in arrears where a decision has to be made as to whether there's any hope of collecting, and so on. So I would think that since the program is relatively new that that would not be the case, but I will confirm for my honourable friend. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. SAUL CHERNIA CK, Q. C. (Minister of Finance) (St. Johns): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the Honourable Member for Riel asked a question which I took as notice.

On Page 1102 of Hansard he asked, pointed out that it1s indicated that the results of the Succession Duty Tax Act brought to Manitoba approximately one-quarter of the estimated return, namely one million versus four million of the y.ear in question, and he asked for an indication of the reason for the drastic shortfall. Firstly I should say that one estimates what one expects will be payable in the coming year based on some knowledge of the past but no foreknowledge of the future. People live and die not in accordance with the plans that may be made for them in governments. Mr.

Speaker, I point out to the honourable member that the statement on Page 28 and 29 of Public Accounts of revenue for the year ended March 31st, 1973, does show the figure of Estimated Revenue for Manitoba Succession Duty Gift Tax of four million, does show a receipt of $1, 770, 323. 00. A few lines or some ten lines above that under the same category of the Department of Finance is an item entitled Estate Tax showing no estimated revenue, and showing a receipt of one and a half - well $1,536,250. 00.

The total revenue therefore from the State and Succession Duty Taxation was somewhere in excess of two and a half million dollars which is still one and a half million dollars less than had been estimated would come from that source. One point I could make on that is that in the first year of succession duty taxation there was certainly a lag in the administrative process. Members will remember that this Act was - notice was given of the intent of government, but the Act itself took a little while to get through this House•s deliberation and was passed retroactively some time well into the year.

The administration process then was obviously slowed up and took some time before they caught up with their work. That may be an explanation. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR . CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder then directly whether the Minister is suggesting or verifying that there will be no reduction, or no significant reduction, as a result of people rearranging their affairs with regards to the moneys that they would normally pass on in succession. MR . CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, I suppose some people make efforts to rearrange and have for many many years.

There is nothing to indicate any appreciable reason but I•d be glad to discuss it with the honourable member during the Budget Speech - I understand he is my counterpart in the shadow Cabinet - and we could discuss it either under Estimates or when the Budget is presented and then the Estimates of Revenue will be before him for this coming year. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell. MR . HARRY E. GRAHAM (Birtle-Russell): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Co-operative Development.

I would like to ask the Minister if the Management Services and the supervision provided by his department to the South Indian Co-operative included the drawing up of the contracts and the tender specifications for the building of the South Indian Lake Co-operative. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I•ll have to take that question as notice. MR . GRAHAM: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

When the Minister is taking that as notice, will he also take as notice the question of whether the tenders, if any were called, came to his department and if so, how many bids were received, and if there were any could he indicate what the tender price was for the construction of the South Indian Lake Co-op? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MR . LLOYD AXWORTHY (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister responsible for housing.

Does the government plan any immediate steps in the field of rural or native housing to take immediate advantage of the newly announced program by the Federal Government in the rural and native housing field?

1136 March 7, 1974 ORAL QUESTIONS MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR . MILLER: Mr. Speaker, the Board of the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation is working on a number of projects, this is one of them. MR . AXWORTHY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister tell us when the House might expect the 1973 report of the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, con sidering the vital importance housing has in the province at the present time, so that we can examine its past performance and proposed plans. MR . MILLER: 11ll make enquiries. MR .

AXWORTHY: I would also like to ask the Minister if he expects to bring the Estimates for the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation before this House within the next week or two, so that we can also get down to debate on this important issue. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lake side. MR . ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the Honour able the Minister of Agriculture. Can the Minister tell me whether or not as late as this February, just last month, Mr.

Max Hofford, the Chairman of the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation sent an official representative to investigate and examine the conditions of the farm of one Gordon Monkman, and is it a case that the representative or himself, Mr. Hofford, subsequently recommended the advancing to Mr. Monkman money sufficient to purchase an additional 50 cows? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I would prefer that members opposite would respect the fact that the matter is before the courts and we should not be discussing a matter that is before the courts. MR . ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, I had no idea that Mr. Hofford was before the courts or his representative. My question simply is: did the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation send a reprgsentative to this farm under question as late as last month and subsequently advance additional moneys for an additional 50 animals? It would be obvious to the Minister of Agriculture that as late as last month there obviously must have been considerable problems ... MR . SPEAKER: Ques tion. Question, Order please. MR. ENNS: ... The animals must have been in the state of malnutrition at that time. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: For the benefit of my honourable friend no additional moneys were advanced, but I don•t think we should entertain discussing that particular case since it is before the courts, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Liberal Party state his matter of order? MR. ASPER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The issue that the Minister has just raised is one which is very familiar to all of us I think, the issue of what can be discussed and what can•t be discussed. Mr.

Speaker, what is before the courts was a man guilty or not guilty of cruelty to animals, and nothing else. What is before the courts is not the question of did the government aid, make grants, loans, and so, and I want it very clearly understood that the rule of law is that this House can discuss anything except the issue relating to the specific charge. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable House Leader. MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order.

I don•t think that the Minister indicated that he was relying on any rule of the House, and 11m not even going to comment on that one way or the other, but the matter of order is that the Minister can answer or not answer questions. If he chooses to say why he is not answering questions, it doesn't affect the rules of order. MR . SPEAKER: I recognize both points of order. The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR . EINARSON: Mr. $peaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture under Co-operative Development.

Can the Minister confirm that the loan funds obtained from the Freshwater Fish Marketing Commission by his own department were used for direct benefits for the fishermen and as a result - resulted in shortages of adequate cash flow for effective operation of the fisheries complex?

March 7, 1974 1137 OR AL QUESTI ONS MR . SPEAK ER : The Honourable Min iste r of Agriculture. MR . USKIW: No , Mr. Speaker, I re ally don 't know, I couldn•t tell my honourable friend . MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for Rie l. MR . CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I dir ect a further question to the Ministe r in charge of Co-operativ e Development . Can he indic ate whether he is aware of any trust liabilitie s certi fied by the Department of Co-o perative Development that ar e not now available for payment ? MR . SP EAK ER: The Hon ourable Minister. MR .

USKIW: Is the honourable member referring to the same co-o perativ e that he alluded to a few moments ago? MR . CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I am in this cas e referri ng to the Ilford Co-operative. MR . USKIW: We ll again, Mr. Speaker, I•ll have to look at Hansard to get his precise question and I will respond when I get the in formation from the department . MR. SPEAK ER : The Hon ourable Member for Gladstone. MR . JAMES R . FERGUSON (Gladstone) : Thank you, Mr . Speaker.

I ' d like to direct my question to the Ministe r of Industry and Commerce and ask him can the Mi niste r ind icate whether any charge s have be en brought to his atten tion, or to the attention of the department, dealin g with PE P grants for fishing co-o perati ves in the north in which materials were either allowed to be pilfered or were not used and rotted? MR . SPEAK ER : Or ders of the Day. The Hon ourable Ministe r of Industry and Commerce. HON . LEONARD S . EVANS (Ministe r of Industry and Commerce) (Brand on East) : Mr.

Speaker, first of all this is not in the juris diction of the Departm ent of Industry and Commerce as such, It is in the juris diction of the Provincial Employment Committee, of which I am a member . My answer is no, Mr. Speaker . MR . FERGUSON : Another question, Mr . Speaker . Can the Minister indicate whether any PEP grants paid out by his department have be en paid out by si gned trust cheques in blank ? MR . EV ANS: I•m not aware of that, Mr . Speaker . MR . SPEAK ER : The Hon ourable Member for Assiniboia, MR . PA TR ICK: Mr .

Speaker, I have a question for the Hon ourable Min iste r of Industry and Commerce. My question is : has the Department of Industry and Commerce completed any labour supply studi es in the garment ind ustry in Manito ba, and would he table those studi es ? MR . SPEAKE R: Th e Hon ourable Min ist er of Industry and Commerce . MR. EV ANS: Well over the years, Mr. Speaker, we have done vari ous studi es on manpower requir ements in var ious ind ustri es, I'm not aware of any very rec ent detailed studi es ofthat nature . MR . PA TRICK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary.

Was the high rate of unemployment in Manitoba the main reason for the government 's opposit ion to the request of imported labour into the provinc e for the garment ind ustry ? MR . EVANS : The figures that the honourable member refers to of course are figures compiled by Statistics Canada, the monthly labour force survey, and I would say that that is one of the major re asons , yes. MR . PA TR ICK: A suppleme ntary , Mr. Speaker . Do es the Go vernment of Manitoba have any studi es to indicate that the labour shortage in the garment industry, can be met without importation of labour ? MR . EV ANS: Mr.

Speaker, the fact that - unfortunately the fact is that there ar e many thousands of people, particularly those who are rather disa dvantaged people, that are un employed in this provinc e and we all, all of us have to make a valued effort to give them a first opportunity to work, MR . SPEAK ER: The Hon ourable Member for Swan Ri ver. MR . JAMES H . BI LT ON (Swan Ri ver) : Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Ministe r of Northern Affairs .

Can the Ministe r ind icate whether any of his officials have brought to his attention waste and misuse by the co- operati ves of materials supplied under the federal and provincial grants ? MR . SP EAK ER : The Hon ourable Member for Virden. MR . MORRIS McGRE GOR (Vir den) : Mr . Speaker, I direct this question to the Ministe r of Agric ultur e in charge of Co-o perative Developme nt . Is it true that the fish co-op at South Indian Lake was payin g fishermen 13 ce nts per lb . instead of 17 ce nts per lb.,

1138 March 7, 1974 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR . McGREGOR cont•d) ....• which indicated that the co-operative was short-changing fi shermen in order to pay for debts caused by mismanagement? MR . SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Assiniboia. MR . PATIUCK: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister responsible for Housing. Has the government or its agency purchased any homes from Misawa Home plant? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR . MILLER: Yes, I believe that there are, that there were some homes contracted for with Misawa Homes.

I can't recall the number or where they would be located. MR . P ATIUCK: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister indicate to the House what price the government paid? Was it in the neighborhood of 35, 000 per home? MR . MILLER: Mr. Speaker, I certainly have to take that question as notice and with a great deal of curiosity about, and doubt about, that amount that he just mentioned. MR . PATRICK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister also take the question as notice if the homes are inspected and the quality of the homes. MR . MILLER: Mr.

Speaker, I 1m sure they'd have to meet the usual inspections of CMHC AND MHRC. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell. MR . GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct a question to the Minister in charge of Co-operatives. I would like to ask him why a conveyor belt valued at approximately $60,000 was recommended by the administrators from his department to be installed at the South Indian Lake Co-op, and has never been used? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I don't have any knowledge as to the way in which the plant was engineered, or who recommended the project, and whether in fact all of the designs were put in place as recommended, or whether in fact complete utilization of the equipment and machinery has or has not been used by the co-operative. The question really is one for the co-operative itself. Now we are not here prepared to answer questions over the private affairs of a co-operative.

I indicated to my honourable friend before that the department does assist any co-operative in the establishment of that co-operative and in the initial stages of its operation but tries not to interfere in the management decisions as much as possible. Now we also know that to the extent that we are involved financially we would want to to have a closer look at the operation, and we do, but we are dealing with a lot of very inexperienced people in that part of the province which do require a great deal of assistance, which is provided from time to time, but which in the end must make their own decisions. MR .

GRAHAM: A supplementary question. Would the Minister then endeavour to find out and report back to the House on his find ings? MR . USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I think that is presumptuous to say the least. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honour able the Minister of Health and Social Development. Are fourth year medical students in Manitoba working as hospital clerks being paid less that the minimum wage? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR . MILLER: Mr.

Speaker, insofar as the fourth year medical students are concerned I don't think they're being paid. MR . SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, has the Minister any plans to meet with students to consider their request that they be brought up to remuneration standards on a par with other students in Canada? MR . MILLER: Mr. Speaker, I believe I1ve answered this question twice, I1ll now answer for the third time.

The fourth year students are spending part of their clinical time for clinical studies at the ·hospital as part of the training which is required for them to become doctors, and so therefore it is part of the work study activity in which they're involved during the course of becoming doctors. MR . SHERMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. More directly, Mr. Speaker, is the Minister planning to meet with the student association or the medical faculty on the matter? MR . MILLER: Mr. Speaker, I met with the representative of the students about a year ago.

March 7, 1974 1139 OR AL QUES TION S MR . SPE AKER: The Honourable Le ader of the Li beral Party . MR. ASPER : Mr . Speaker, my question is to the Mi niste r responsible for the Manitoba Development Corporation, following the que stion of the unus ed equipment. Is it a fact, or will he confirm for us , that part of the equipment bought by Phoenix Data, a Crown corporati on in the computer bus ine ss, also remains crated and unused to the value of se veral te ns of thousands , if not hundreds of thousands of dollars? MR . SPE AKER: Th e Hon ourable Mini ster of Mines . MR . GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, I don •t recall a previous question bei ng put to me on unused equipment but it may be that in the -- and I rea lly can' t answer the question that has be en rai sed by my honourable friend; I can 't confirm it or deny it . MR . ASPER: Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister, it re lates to the question he took as not ice , I be lieve yesterday. The question is: Can he indi cate to th e Hous e why at the time he filed the Mani toba Development Corporati on re port containing the informati on that we owned only 24 percent of the Willi am Clare Company , a new . . . MR . SPE AKER: Question, question . MR .

ASPER: Mr. Speaker, the question is , did he know when the re port was filed, not when it was printed but when it was filed in this House that the re port was wrong, that we owned 80 perce nt. MR . GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I am by no means ce rtain that the report is wrong.

It may be that as at March 31, 1973 - and now the honourable member has again raised some thing which I•m not aware of - but as at March 31, 1973, we could have owned a certain percent; the date that I filed the re port would be anoth er date, and I don•t think that there is any obligati on on my part to when I am filing the re port stat ing everything that happened between March 31, 1973 and the date that I filed the re port. I mean that is an astoni shi n g propositi on, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, I do have another answer to make to a questi on that was asked yeste rday regar ding MDC and Shell er Globe, my information is that ther e is nothing in the contract which would requi re the Manitoba Go vernm ent to buy bus es from Shelle r Globe. We do have a te n percent int erest in the company , I think that it probably would reflect a desir e, but there is nothi ng in the contract , and I can te ll my honourable frie nd that there was nothing so far as thi s particular transaction that he raised yesterd ay is concerned, or the day before, that I am aware of. MR . AS PER: Mr.

Speaker, to the same Mi niste r relat ing to his just gi ven answer, can he indicate what other mater ial differences exist between th e informati on - are there other mate ri al differences that exist between the information contained in the MDC report that he filed and the facts as they are today before we go to commi ttee to debate a report which is us eless. MR . GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, the honourable member has just asked me to do what I said that I would not do, and I did indicate, and this was in respons e to a request from the Le ader of the Oppositi on where the procedure was changed that up until las t year the members of the committee asked quest ions only up to the date of the fil ing of the re port . Last year we ind icated to the committee that they could ask questions not only up to th e date of the ending of the re port but up to the date of the re port coming to com mittee.

I•ve also indi cated to the honourable member that at the first meetin g of committee I expect the chairman to give the financial statements , that's P and L•s and balance sheets , to all of the members of those companie s in which we hold equity , that we would then have additional mee ti ngs so that th ey would have those financial statem ents in advanc e of the followi ng me etings . I beli eve I indic ated, Mr.

Speaker, yesterday that I got my Royal Bank statement, it di d not have P and L statements of the companies in which the Royal Bank has shares , or even fully owned subsidi arie s; it had some balance sheets , assets and lia bili ti es , but not P and L statements . Th e Inco stat ement does not have stateme nts , P and L statements , of all the companies in which it held secur ities or shares , and that the people of Manitoba are ent itled, and are getting, far more publication of the financ ial affai rs in which they have an int erest than is done in any private company. MR .

SPE AKER: The Hon ourable Le ader of the Opposition . MR . SPIV AK: Mr . Speaker, my question is to the Ministe r of Co-o perative Develop me nt. I won der if he can confirm to this Hous e that in statin g that hi s department assists in

1140 March 7, 1974 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. SPIV AK cont•d) , , , , , services to the fishing co-operatives, he is essentially mis representing the position of the involvement of his department? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister, MR . USKIW: No I don •t believe that to be the case, Mr, Speaker, As far as I'm aware we have involved ourselves only in the assistance of developing co-operatives, the establish ment of new ones, and in the initial stage of management by way of advice, and so on, but we are not operating co-operatives per se, MR .

SPIV AK: Yes, a supplementary, I wonder if the Minister could inform the House why powers of attorney of the board of directors were taken by his development officers to be able to run the co-operatives, MR . USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I would have to take that question as notice because I'm not aware of the event or to which co-operative it may apply, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris, MR . WARNER H, JORGENSON (Morris): Mr.

Speaker, I should like to direct this question then to the Minister of Agriculture in his capacity as Minister of Co-operative Development, and ask him if his department as he claims has had no responsibility, or has no direct involvement with the co-ops, why in a press release of November 3, 1973, or a press report, it says, "The reason" - and this is dealing with the failure of the Ilford Co-op - "The reason in the view of the fishermen was poor management mainly on the part of a manager sent in by the Provincial Department of Co-operative Services," MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture, MR .

USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I think that•s a pretty fair comment because on occasion, on occasion co-operatives who find themselves completely helpless ask the department to send someone in to assist them, and we respond as we can, But· we do not have within the department management expertise, we have co-operative development officers, and to the extent that they are able to assist (

a) in finding a manager, or temporarily assisting the co-operative in management decisions, they do, but really they are not designed or competent to do so. We do not have co-operative managers available within the staff of the department, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition, MR . SPIV AK: Mr. Speaker, my question's to the Minister of Co-operative Development, I wonder whether he can inform the House whether the co-operatives of Southern Indian Lake, at Ilford and Moose Lake are now closed? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture, MR . USKIW: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I have no way of knowing without checking with the department, I suspect that there may be any number either closed, or considering closing, or opening, So until I get the information I cannot advise my honourable friend. MR . SPIVAK: By way of supplementary, I wonder whether the Minister is in a position to advise whether the fishermen are now selling their fish to a Saskatchewan Co-operative? MR . USKIW: I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that they are selling their fish where it is advantageous for them to do so, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St, James, MR .

MINAKER: Thank you, Mr, Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health and Social Welfare, In his reply with regards to purchase of homes by his department from Misawa Homes, I wonder if the Minister could advise us if the homes were purchased under a public tendering set-up, or were they purchased directly by his department, with no other people invited to give a price on the supply of these homes, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health, MR .

MILLER: Mr, Speaker, I think I know the answer and it would be that it was tendered, but I1d have to take the question as notice to determine whether in fact I am correct in this assumption, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek, MR . J. FRANK JOHNSTQN (Sturgeon Creek): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, Has there been a mill rate struck, and will the people of Leaf Rapids be paying taxes to pay back their local improvements this year? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON.

HOWARD PAWL EY (Attorney-General) (Selkirk): I think there will be, Mr. Speaker, for this year. If the honourable member requires further particulars I would take it as notice,

March 7, 1974 114 1 ORAL QUESTIONS MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR . IliARION: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the Minister of Health and Social Development. Does the government intend to lower the age of consent for surgical operations whereby allowing operations to be performed without parental consent on children younger than the present limit, much along the lines as the legislation now being brought forward in Ontario? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health, MR. MILLER: I•m behind in my reading, obviously I didn•t read today's paper. Mr.

Speaker, if it just came out today then I have no immediate response. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell. MR . GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and my question is directed to the Minister of Northern Affairs, and I would like to ask him what efforts his department is making to capture their elusive little beavers that were supposed to have caused the flooding on the Ilford-York winter road? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. RON McBRYDE (Minister of Northern Affairs) (The Pas): Mr.

Chairman, there was a suggestion that the Member for Birtle-Russell might like to go up and try and catch them. Mr. Chairman, I understand that they're -- the effort, the slush that has been caused is now freezing over and the road should be opened very soon. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Liberal Party. MR . ASPER: Mr. Speaker, my question's to the Minister of Corporate Affairs. Does the government intend to intervene in the proposed 9 cents per quart rise in the price of milk as recommended by the Chairman of the Milk Board, Mr. Kristjanson? MR . USKIW: Mr. Speaker, • . MR . SPEAKER: Order please.

Order please. The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs. HON. IAN TURNBULL (Minister of Consumer, Corporate and Internal Services) (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, the affairs of the Milk Control Board are not going to be intervened in by my department. I think that the increase that the Member for Wolseley has referred to has not been approved by the Milk Control Board as yet, but it is a figure that came out of the hearings that occurred at the hearing sponsored by the Milk Control Board. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Liberal Party. MR . ASPER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister.

Does he accept the proposed price increase in the light of the dairy companies' request for only a three-cent rise? MR. TURNBULL: Mr. Speaker, as the price first referred to by the - the price increase first referred to by the Member for Wolseley is not in fact a natural price increase, I think the question tends to be hypothetical.

However, I would say, Sir, that I regard the milk industry in Manitoba as one that is now regulated and that any prices that do occur, any price increases that do occur, presumably have been justified before the Milk Control Board, consequently I would not thiDk that my department would intervene if price increases were justified.

It would not intervene ( 1) because prices were presumably justified; and secondly, Sir, because my department has an interest in maintaining a viable milk producing industry in the Province of Manitoba, and I•m assuming that the work of the Milk Control Board does protect the consumer and also protects the viability of the milk industry in this province. MR . ASPER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the same Minister.

I wonder if he will consider favourably recommending, or taking appropriate legislative steps, to see in the light of his answer that consumer representatives are now appointed to government marketing boards so that they are not only producer-oriented but consumer-oriented as well. MR . TURNBULL: Mr.

Speaker, it's my understanding that the Milk Control Board does now have a representative of consumers in its membership, In addition, Sir, it is also my understanding that at the present hearing of the Milk Control Board, the Canadian Consumers Association did in fact appear and did apparently not object to justifiable increases in the price of milk. MR . SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. Address for Papers. The Honourable Member for Swan River.

11 42 March 7, 1974 ADDRESS FOR PAPERS MR. BILTON: Mr. Speaker, I mo ve, seconded by the Honourabl e Member for St. James, that an humble address be voted to Hi s Honour the Li eutenan t-Gov ernor praying for copi es of the Report of the Planni ng and Pri ori ties Commi ttee of Cabi net on women in the civ il ser vice completed in 1972 which was the subject of recommend ations of the task force report released on 22nd of January, 1974. MOTION presented. MR. SPE AKER: The Honourabl e Mini ster of Labour. HON. RUSSELL PAULLE Y (Minister of Labour ) (Transcona): Mr.

Speaker, I don't be lie v e that there would be any objecti on to tabling a couple of copies of that report. It was a confi dential report. I haven' t made my recommend ati ons to my co lleagues in Cabinet as to the dealings within the whole context of the task .report, but I can in dicate to my honourable friend that I would have no objecti ons to that, but I' d appreciate the courtesy of a slight delay in order that I may confer with my co lleagues first. MR. SPE AKER: The Honourabl e House Leader. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the honourable member would accept the under taking by the Minis ter that the report will be table d, and withdraw the Address for Papers, because the Address for Papers refers to an inte rnal document and it's norma lly not somethi ng that the House would vote to give, but if the Mi ni ster of Labour indi cates that it 's going to be forwarded, would that be sati sfactory to the honourable member? MR. BILTON: I have a choi ce between the two Ministers, Mr. Speaker. I'm very happy to acced e to the suggestion made by the Mi ni ster of Mi nes and Natural Resources. MR.

SPEAKER: Very well, So ordered. The Address for Papers withdrawn. The Honourabl e House Leader. MR. GRE EN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, would you now go to the second rea ding of bills? GOV ERNMENT BILLS - SEC OND RE ADING - BILL NO. 7 MR. SPEAKER: Very well. Bill No. 7. The Honourabl e Mi nister of Labour was speaking. MR. PAULLE Y: Mr. Speaker, yesterd ay I took a cons iderable period of time to point out to the House the reasons why I thought that the Assembly should not accept the six months' hoist as proposed by the Honourabl e Member for Gladstone. I did so for a number of reasons.

Fi rst of all, after having perused all of the comments made by honourable members opposite that !found a sort of a two-forked approach, a tongue approach by the Conser v ative Party in particular, that half of their spokesmen did in dicate support for the general premise insofar as polit ical partici pation by the ci vil servants, and others did not. There was in some of their contri butions to the debate a question as to whether or not the Employees Associ ation wanted to be able to partic ipate in political affairs.

I think I proved without question that the majori ty, about 55 or 56 percent by a referen dum vote of the Mani toba Go vernment Employees Associ ation, did want to be considered the same as everybody else in the Province of Manitoba. I further pointed out, Mr. Speaker, that there was legis lation in some of our si ster provinces gi ving the Ci vil Service the right to participat ion contrary to what some thoughts were in the mind s of honourable friend s opposi te. I also pointe d out, Mr.

Speaker, yester day, in reply to the questi on of urgency that I felt that there was a like lihood of a rel atively early federal electi on due to the si tuation pre vailing at Ottawa with a mi nor ity governm ent, and I thought that it was only fair and reasonab le that this particu lar bill should not be killed but should be allowed to go into the commi ttee for cons iderati on. I gave it another undertaking that I gave when I undertook to in troduce the bi ll, Mr. Speaker, that if reason able amendments were suggested, we' d certai nly take a look at them. I also pointed out, Mr.

Speaker, that under the present Act the Civil Service in its ent irety, from Deputy Ministers down, had the ri ght of full partic ipation, including the collec tion of moneys for any political party up until the issuance of a writ of an electi on, ei ther federally or provinc ially. · So I want to appeal to my honourable friends. I realize, I realize after a few years in this House that someti mes the six months' hoist is given as a device to hav e another round of oratory of establishing prin ci ples. But I think in this particul ar case, Mr.

Speaker, members of the Assembly have had ample opportuni ty and ample ti me to bri ng forth thei r respectiv e views.

March 7, 1974 114 3 BILL 7 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) ..• Thi s isn't rea lly the type of a bi ll in my opinion that would warrant undue delay if we rea lly and sincerel y be lieve in the ri ghts and the freedoms of ind ivi duals in soci ety today. Yester day, I referred to the former - a former Presi dent of the United States, one who was well res pected by all of the community, not only here in the North Ameri can conti nent, but elsewhere as well.

I pointed out that in Franklin Roosevel t' s message to Congress in January of 1941 he stated four freedoms! the first is freedom of speech and express ion any where in the world; the second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way everywhere in the world; the third is freedom from want everywhere in the world; the fourth is freedom from fear everywhere in the world. I think Mr. Speaker, that some of the eom� ments made by my honourable friends opposite ind icate that the application of the absence of fear within the Ci vil Service if this bill were to pass would becom e mani fest.

I thi nk the opposite is true, Mr. Speaker, that the fear can be there at the present time, because they fear that if they express thei r o pinions then they will be subject to discip line within thei r re specti ve de partments and juri sdi cti ons. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this is not so. I suggested, Mr. Speaker, that we should be no di fferent here, that this Assem bly and this government, and in this in stance when I'm talking about government, Mr.

Speaker, I'm not just talking of this si de of the House, I'm talking about government general ly, that should not conti nue to have di fferent rule games, or rules of the game for our employees than prevail elsewhere. Th ese were the basic principles, Mr. Speaker, under which I in troduced this bill. It is not unusual for me to take this position because it' s a posi ti on that I have taken genera lly speaking throughout my whole poli tical career.

It is true, as the Honourabl e Member for Riel pointed out, that in 196 0 I did not object to the bill; and it is true as I ind icated that the bi ll was in troduced by me about five years ago, sti ll contai ning the clause of prohibi tion. But I did in dicate, Mr. Speaker, that on due reflecti on, I was wrong in '60 , I was wrong in '64 or '69, and my honourable friend says I' m wrong in '7 4 - I don't believe that I am.

I believe that he, the Honourable Member for Lakeside, who on occas ion is a very knowledgeable and charming ind ivi dual, sti ll wants to keep us back in the 19th ce ntury, and of course I think he can be changed. I would suggest that if his present Leader - and I understand his competi tor for leadership in the next ensui ng Conservative Party - may be able to use some of his influence on my friend from Lakeside to ind icate to him the error of the ways of the Member for Lake si de, although as I pointed out, too, yest erday, Mr.

Speaker, the Honourabl e the Leader of the Conservative Party spoke with both si des of the cheek, because at one time he was giving verbiage, or suggesti ng, that he was in favour of the employees of this government having the ri ght to free expressi on and then finished up hi s address by saying, well everybody else can have it except the Ci vil Service of Manitoba. I'm very inter este d, Mr. Speaker, or was very inte res ted the other day to note that in a news item, Mr. Speaker, that a gentleman by the name of James L. McP herson of Vancouver, spoke to a grou p here in the province.

He told the Insti tute of Chartered Acc ountants of Mani toba, "that what is needed to inj ect more busi ness expertise into government is a sweeping change in the attitude of busi ness toward government and the political process in the countr y. " And the

article goes on further to say, Mr. Speaker, and here again I quote from the pa per as alleged to ..• A MEMBER: What paper ? MR. PAULLEY: ••• I rea lly don't know. A MEMBER: Well, you're making it difficult. MR. PAULLEY: Well, I' ll table it. MR. SPEAKER: Order please . Order please. MR. PAULLEY: Well, if it was the Free Press, it was - I'm sure that the Free Press would not want to publish anything that I might use in order to support my case, because no other paper is more vindictive against the Mi nister of Labour than the Free Press. However, Mr.

Chairman, if my honourable friend, if my honourable friend from Lake side would give me an opportunity, I would like to read what Mr. Mc Pherson said, and whether the arti cle was in the Tri bune or the Free Press it was not an editor ial, it was a news item. And Mr . Mc Pherson sai d: "He sai d, it wouldn' t be di fficult to formulate polic ies for leave of absence for employees seeki ng time to help in campaigns. All that is needed is the accep tance

1144 March 7, 1974 BILL 7 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) .•• of the attitu de that any person in a demo cracy has the right to take

part in political campaigns without compromising his career. Mr. McPhers on sa id that in his opinion the major ef fort mus t be made to accommod ate the businessman who chooses to enter politics as a candid ate for office . " Now basically, Mr. Speaker, that is what I am sa ying. I'm not sa ying it insofar as business is concerned. We know that one of the large business institutions he re in Winnipeg some short time ago -I 'm referring to the Great West Life - did indicate to their em ployees that they had fr eedo m of participation, and fr eedo m of se curity, if they took

part in political affairs . All I'm asking, and all the government is asking, Mr. Speaker, in the principle contained in Bill No . 7, is to give what Mr. McPherson su ggests for business, and the Great West Life did, and this shoul d be ex tended to all business and all parts of the community. I s ay, Mr. Spea ker, and I appe al to all members of this House to allow this bill to go into com mittee, to give considera tion to the principle contained there in.

There may be objections to some sections of the bill, but I plead with my ho noura ble fri ends oppos ite, and all members of this House, do not kill this bill, and it won' t be killed, I know that; I do know that under this motion that there can be speech afte r speech after speech, delay afte r delay afte r delay - this is a parliamentary de vice that is as old as the hills. But I appeal to my honour able friends opposite not to use it because while this particular

section of the bill, present 44 , is contained on our statute books, we are de priving the civil ser vants of the Province of Manitoba the right of fr eedo m of involvement in the affairs of Manitoba and in Canada as free citizens in a fre e community. This is the important thing.

If there are objec tions to the mechanics and other tidying up articles within the bill that is before the members, I appeal to them to not delay fu rther this bill, to allow it to go to the committee, and if all that comes out of the he arings at Co mmittee is the right of fre e partici pation of our employees, I think that history will prove, Mr. Speaker, that this First Session of the 30th Legislature of the Province of Manitoba did ad vance the well being of all citizens in this free so ciety we call Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Morris. MR. JORGENSON: Mr.

Speaker, the Minister of Labour wound up his speech today on a very timid note contrasting greatly with the wind and the bluster that we heard yesterday. Yesterday, Sir, in the opening of his remarks - and one could see from the last week or so that the Minister was very ea ger to get into the de bate, and we had every reason to believe that that ea gerness was prompted by a desire to communicate something to this side of the House. Well, Sir, all we heard yesterday was the wind and bluster. Sir, it was explained to the Minister the pur pose of the amendment by the Member for Gladstone.

We ha ve de vices within our rules that afford us the opportunity from time to time to do certain things, and during the cou rse of the de bate it became obvious that even some members on the other side of the House were not certain as to the

interpretation of certain se ctions of that Act. I refer to the Minister of Pu blic Works who urg ed the Minister to have a se cond look at certain se ctions of the Act because he was now beginning to have some dou bts as to whether or not those se ctions of the Act should be proceeded with. And on the --(Inter jection)-- Well the Minister of Pu blic Works corrects me. He points his fi nger up, and that indicates there was one

section and I'm going to concur with that. I want to make sure, I don't want to misinterpret his words, that there was a se ction in the Act or a por tion of that se ction that he would like to ha ve a se cond look at. Having received that informat ion and that indication from ho nour able gentlemen opposite, we thought here that we wou ld provide the Minis ter with an opportunity to end the de bate very shortly. A MEMBER: He ar, he ar. MR. JORGENSON: And rather than moving the amendment for the pur pose of killing the bill, which is what the Minister seems to indicate ... A MEMBER: Well, isn' t it true?

A MEMBER: No. MR. JORGENS ON: .•. we moved the amendment as indicated by my honour able friend from Glads tone, to provide the Minister with an opportunity of communicating to this House his willingness to listen to some of the sug ges tions that had been made and to propose some amendments to the Legislation which would meet some of the objections that had been raised from this side of the House. That was the pur pose of that amendment, and the Minister knows that.

March 7, 1974 114 5 BILL 7 (MR. JORGENSON cont'd) ... But the Minister has been - he indicated a while ago that he's been 20 years in this House, and during those 20 years in this House he has never been able, as is characteristic of some of his colleagues, never been able to make the transformation from opposition to government. He has a position of responsibility, and in that position of responsibility has an opportunity to make decisions. We provided him with that opportunity; we provided him with a chance to indicate that he would be prepared to have a second look at some of the sections of that bill.

Sir, I say with deep regret that he failed to take advantage of that opportunity. Instead used his time to rant and to bluster, as is his character, rather than using the conciliatory tone that he could have used; rather than indicating to members of this side of the House that he was prepared to listen to some of the suggestions, as indeed the Minister of Public Works is. Sir, no such indication came from the Minister of Labour. MR. ENNS: None at all. MR. JORGENSON: He suggested that the members were using this opportunity only for the purpose of venting their lumps.

Well if this is the only opportunity that the government is going to provide for us to do that, then it doesn't say a great deal for the kind of legislation that they're bringing in to this Session. Sir, they argue from the position that all this bill intends to do is allow the civil servants to run and then having been defeated or otherwise can return back into the Civil Service. Sir, we've never questioned that. From time to time members on this side of the House said, we are prepared to accept that. They tried to convince us, and indeed as they've convinced themselves, that that's the only

section in the bill. That, Sir, is not the principle of the bill. That's only a portion of it. The Minister, and some of his colleagues, have never been able to separate that one provision in the bill from others that are objectionable to us. The one that will set up a core of bagmenrto act on behalf of the govern ment. Sir, we object to that one, and we've said so; and there was no indication from the Mini ster at all that he would intend to have a look at that

section of the bill and to remove it, or at the very least modify it. Sir, the Minister is impaired capacity for anticipation has created a situation 'now where we don't know whether the bill is going to be rammed through, as the Minister has a habit of doing, without listening to reason, or whether we could end the debate, go into Committee and have the amendments made. The Minister lost an opportunity that had been provided for him by the Member for Gladstone. And I am really sorry that he didn' t take advantage of that opportunity to close the debate in a reasonably short period tof time.

We now, unless some thing can be communicated to him from more reasonable members of that side of the House, we are now in the position of not knowing whether or not we should continue to oppose the principle of this bill, or certain portions of the principle of this bill, or do what I in trepidation would be inclined to do, and that is take the Minister's word that he will look at certain sections . He' s given no indication of what

section he may look at ... A MEMBER: And how hard. MR. JORGENSON: .•. and how hard he'd look at it. Well, we have had some experience with taking the word of honourable gentlemen opposite and I am sorry to say, Sir, that that experience leads us to reject any of those blandishments on the part of the Mini ster.

And I come now to the remarks made by the Minister of Finance who indicated during the course of his remarks, as shown on Page 707 of Hansard, that he said, "I haven't read the Minister's speech" - indicating in that comment the Minister of Labour who read out the prin ciple of the bill when he introduced it. I might add as an afterthought that he wouldn't have learned very much if he did. But he goes on to say, "My own belief is that a person who wishes to participate in political affairs during an election should have a right to do so and should be guaranteed tenure in the event that he comes back.

That to me, "he said, "is the pUrpose of the bill. " And then he goes on a little further to say, "That really to me is the essence of the bill, and that is the principle on which I intend to vote. " Sir, what they've done is blindly closed their eyes to the reality of the bill.

They refuse to recognize what is in the bill, and I think Sir, that that stems from a characteristic that we have noted, and particularly in the Minister of Agriculture, the characteristic that I stated a few days ago, a tendency to assume, and that's a happy position to be in, a tendency to assume that the fact of a given situation just happily coincides with their conception of it, wittJ.out really attempting to understand what is con tained in the legislation before us - and we've had an example of that on the part of the Minister of Finance during the course of recent debate on another measure.

The Minister of

1146 March 7, 1974 BILL 7 (MR. JORGENSON cont'd) ... Finance seems to be oblivious to the real principle behind this bill. Just as oblivious to principle as he was under the Mineral Acr eage Tax Act when he so blithely suggested that the principle of that piece of legislation had not been changed, or that the principle of that bill was something that it wasn't. A manifestation of that attitude, Sir, further comes from one who was a former member of this House who now sits in the gallery from time to time and writes learned columns . . . A MEMBER: For what paper ? MR.

JORGENSON: The former Minister of -- the former Attorney-General, who in each case that he sits in this Legislature he listens to honourable gentlemen opposite and then writes in his column, "we sure heard facts today. " Facts are those as expressed by honourable gentlemen opposite because they have the happy facility of believing that facts emanate from their utterances, not from anything else. Well, Sir, I suspect that the former At torney-General is attempting, attempting to win all the debates that he lost when he was a Member of this House, and there were many.

Well, Sir, of all of the utterances that we've heard from honourable gentlemen opposite nothing, nothing was more beguiling that: that of the Minister of Mines and Resources in his contribution. "T he fireman. " Sir, every time that the government get into trouble, and I recall there was a pitcher with the New York Yankees who every time one of their first line pitchers got into trouble they'd always throw him in, and he was nicknamed "the fireman, " and I can't recall his name at this moment.

The Minister of Mines and Resources is "the fireman" of honourable gentlemen opposite and every time they get into serious diffic ulty they throw him in and he endeavours to get them out of difficulty. Well they did that during the course of the debate on the Mineral Acr eage Tax Act, and I tell you, Sir, that the temptation to succumb to the blandishments of the Minister of Mines and Resources was irresistible because he argued, and he based his argument, his initial thesis was that the opposition was intelligent, and how could you possibly resist that kind of a thesis ?

And then he built his case from there and it was a - I must say if you accept the initial thesis the logic of his argument flowed, the logic of his argument flowed straight through, but I do. maintain that we were hornswoggled on that.partic ular bill, but I won' t go into that. But he used the same technique during his contribution to this debate. And, Sir, it' s - having once accepted the initial thesis then it' s difficult to accept anything else, and I suspect from time to time that the Minister of Mines and Resources must get his inspiration from the Department of National Revenue in Ottawa.

Just yesterday, Sir, I got a communication from them and that was beguiling in its concept. The letter that I received said that: "Your return has been adjusted in accordance withour letter dated January 2nd, 1973" - and they go on to say - "The tax on your blended payment" - whatever that is - "has been recalculated and you have been taxed at a rate that is beneficial to you. " Well, Sir, I fully expected that having read that communica tion I was going to be in receipt of some largesse from the Federal Govern ment. But when I picked up the return, when I picked up the notice, I discovered that I was MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. The Honourable Mini ster of Finance state his point of order. MR . CHE RNIACK! Could we ask the honourable member to table the the paper he was reading from. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR . JORGENSON: Well the Minister of Finance is a real interesting person. I'll send it across to him and he can read it and then return it, because it is the only copy I have. But it really contained nothing of significance other than what I have read. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The honourable member state his point of order? MR.

CH ERNIACK: Is it not in order for a paper that is read from to be tabled? Is it something that the member has the right to retain if it' s his only copy ? MR. JORGENSON: If it �as a document, Sir, that was of some import or significance I would expect it tabled, and I don't mind tabling it, I don't mind tabling it. It' s a communication that I received from the Department of Taxation. If he wants to read my personal taxation problems then he's welcome to them.

March 7, 1974 BILL 7 MR . CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Finance. 1147 MR . CH ERNIACK: I believe that in accordance with the rules I rose and asked that the paper of communication from which the honourable member read should be tabled. I thought it was a rule that on a request of that type that it shall be tabled, and if that is the case then I don't think there ought to be any question as to whether somebody is interested in personal affairs or not.

If I am wrong in my impression, and the Honourable Member for Morris is the one who always poses as the expert, if I am wrong, and you find me wrong, I will sit down with out making speeches, but if I am right, then it should be tabled. MR . JORGENSON: Well, why doesn't the Minister sit down, because I have tabled the document. What's he talking about? MR. CH ERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, until this moment the honourable member has not agreed to table it but has been waving it. He may have said it but he has not agreed to do it, and I haven't seen it yet. MR. SPEAKER: The letter has been tabled.

The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. JORGENSON: The nonsense that is now being spouted unctuously by the Minist er of Fina nce can be characterized as sheer stupidity. I have tabled the document and I told the Min ister that I have no objection to tabling it. Now, if he wants-- I'll tell you what I'll do with the Minister. I will give him all my personal correspondence if that makes him any happier. A MEMBER: Including your love letters. MR .

JORGENSON: The Minister is one of thos e who on occasion wants to live by the letter of the law and wants to live by the rules of this House, but when it suits him he will break them, he will violate them and indeed, Sir, he will destroy them, as he did the other night in his debate on the Mineral Ac reage Tax Act-- (Interjection) --. Well, Sir, the Minister can think what he likes, but we have evidence of some of the Minister's tactics in this House.

An d, Sir, you could say that, although he attempts to portray hims elf as a man of high integrity, I have my own opinions of how the Minister conducts himself in this Chamber and outside of it. I don 't want the Minis ter to forget that. Sir, the government expects us, in their dealings with legislation that is brought before this Chamber, to take their word that all is well, that the principle as enunciated by a Minister is indeed the principle in legislation, and I say, Sir, beca use of the Minister of Finance we're not able to do that, and I don't intend to do that.

We can read the legislation for ourselves. -- (Interjection)-- Well, Sir, we have another example of the reasons why the government would want to bring in such legislation, and I only need to refer to Order-in-Council No. 431, dealing with the appointmen t of one Ch ief, Hedley Robson, as Director of the Animal Industry Branch in the Department of Agriculture. That, Sir, is an indication of the kind of blatant practice that this government carries on in political appointments.

The intention of that appointment, Sir, was to do none other than to implement the government's monopoly position on certain sections of the Animal Husbandry Act. We know that that was the intention of the government, and that really is the intention of the government in this bill, to get their own people appointed to posi tions where they can then conduct election campaigns on behalf of the government. A MEMBER: At public expense. MR . JORGENSON: At public expense. We have seen samples of that.

We saw it when the Minister of Agri culture carried an ad in the Manitoba Co-o perator paid for by the taxpayers of this province in order to promote the Minister's own ... -- (Interjection) --. When I am through and if I have time, I will answer the Minister's questions . But the purpose of that particular venture into coercing people is an indication of the attitude on the part of this govern ment, and we know precise ly what will happen if they're gi ven the opportunity of putting those people in a position of conducting election campaigns at pu blic expense for themselves. We intend to have no part of that.

But, Sir, I wanted to deal particularly with the remarks of the Minister of Mines and Resources because the Minister of Mines and Resources, as I indicated earlier, is one of those who, when he speaks in a debate, commands the attention of the House. And I'll say this much for him, which is more than I can say for the Minis ter of Finance, he is prepared to accept the responsibility for his actions and prepared to accept the responsibility on behalf of the government. They don't try to blame their mistakes on the opposition.

An d I don't say any comment about the Minister of Mines and Resources with any irony because he knows that I

1148 March 7, 1974 BILL 7 (MR. JORGENSON cont 'd) ..... respect his integrity and his powers of analysis. But there were a couple of comments that the Minister made during the course of his remarks in this debate that caught my attenti on, and I think it deals with the heart of this problem. The Member for Lakeside had made a comment, and I will paraphrase that slightly. He said that the govern ment is not just another employer; that there is a difference between an indus tri al employer, an employer as such, and th e government.

And the Minister's reply dealt with that particular aspect of the Member for Lakesid e's comments . He went on to say this, and I quote : "As far as the relatio ns between employees and the government are concerned, it is my suggestio n to you that the very same interests vis-a-vis bargaining, vis-a -vis security, vis-a vis terms and condi tio ns of employment, " and at that point in his remarks the Minister was distracted by an inter jecti on.

But I take it that his central point, that in all of its essential aspects the relatio nship between the governme nt and its employees ought to be, and is, the same between all employers and employees . That interpreta ti on, Sir, is of course reinforced by the rati onale that has been advanced in support of this bill right from the very start - and that goes back to my origina l comments , that when you start from a certain positio n, a basic thes is, and then build your argument around that thesis, if the thesis is correct in the first in stance then there's no problem.

But if that thes is happens to be wrong, then your entire argu ment and all your logic falls. Now, the pr opositio n that the governme nt/employee relati onship is or ought to be the same as all empl oyer/ employee relationships, is an interest ing problem . Indeed, this is rather appealing, because I think no one in the Chamber would want to suggest to any group, any group in this soci ety, be singled out and treated differently from other groups who appear to be in similar positio ns.

And at one level, therefore, one can agree that in terms of security and working conditi ons and so on, the Minister may have a point. But lyin g at the heart of the assumption, in the government 's case, is an assumpti o n that should not be allowed to slip by, and that is the assumption that the government is just like any other empl oyer. I suggest, Sir , that that assumption is far from self-evidently true, because I suggest that the government occupies a posi tio n in soci ety and in the state that is unlike any other ins titu tio n or body.

Govern ment is, in fact, the tangible evidenc e, the symbolic expression, the day to day embodi ment of the poli tical sovere ignty of the state. It is, in virtually all democra tic societies, the effective instrum ent of popular senti ment and aspirations. It is the one body in socie ty, Si r, to which all others may be rendered subordinate. Because in its legal aspects it represents the people as a whole.

The Minister, I expect, would not quarrel with that, but in the course of the same remarks that I referred to, he said on Page 563; "I will not in any way try to influence the way an employee chooses to bargain, chooses a bargain ing agent, and I'm not doing that to help the employee. I'm doing that to help the employer, the government, which is the people that I represent as a Minister of the Crown. " Now, Sir, the Mini ster says, and quite correctly, that as a Minister, as a member of the government, he is an employer . But he is, by be ing a Minister of the Crown, an employer representing people. Now, Mr .

Speaker, what other employer in the soci ety can make that cla im? To pose the question is surely to answer it. No other employer stands in the posi tio n of representin g people. In that respect and in certain others, the government is unique, because it is the govern ment. And it can do many things which will affect or alter relati onships between other employ ees and employers, and has done so - and on the whole, creditably. But my point is that that power is not recipro cal. The government in the fullness of its powers has no peer in any insti tuti on, group or associatio n.

Within its constituti onal jurisdictio n, it is sovereign. Now it may appear, Mr. Speaker, that I'm belabouring this point, but, I make this sug gesti on because several conclus ions are drawn from it . Fi rst, if the government is like no other employer, then those who are employed by the government are not quite like any other employees . They are not necessarily better or worse off--although I think in general they are better in the sense that they have the opportunity to serve the whole co mmunity-- but whether better or worse, they are different.

For if the Mini sters of the Crown are those whom the public have, through their franchi se and the Legis lature, entrusted responsibili ty for general policy and senio r administra ti on at one level, then the employees of the governme nt are those serving the public through general administra tio n and executi on of policy at another level. The critical point, therefore, is this :

Whereas the empl oyee in all other sit uatio ns is there to serve

March 7, 1974 114 9 BILL 7 (MR. JORGENSON cont'd) .... . an interest that is private and limited, the government em ployee is there to serve an interest that is public and unlimited. Unlimited, that is, except by the legal and geographical limits of the governmen t's jurisdiction. Well, Sir, I'm not prepared to argue that the public servant's position should be less se cure and its conditions of work less fair, and so on, I've already made that point. Nor am I prepared to argue that a public servant should not be free to resign, seek public office, and return to the public service if unsuccessful at the polls.

That, indeed, is possible now, and Sir, to just pick up that argument from where the Minister of Public Works left off, he argued that the public needed men of the calibre of those who have had experience in the Civi l Service. Because of their knowledge of the department they would perforce be people who would lend their expertise and their knowledge to the position that they would occupy if became elected. I disagreed with that concept.

I disagreed and that•s a personal disagreement on my part, be cause I believe that the Civ il Service, by the nature of their employment, occupy a unique posi tion in government, and I believe that the politician is the man who, essentially, is the buffer between those who administer the laws on the one hand, and the people who are affected by those laws .

A politician must always be in the position of being able to see both sides, and I suspect that a civil servant who goes into politics - and I've seen some examples of that in Ottawa - tend to lean towards the direction of the Ci vil Service rather than the people, and therefore the people become less ably served as a result; not to quarrel with the expertise and the knowledge that those people bring to the Civ il Service or to government, but, Sir, that expertise and that knowledge can be hired rather than elected. Now, the Minister of Mines and Resources has a question. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister.

MR . GREEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm sorry I came in in the middle of the honour able member's argument, but I take it that he said that what other employer is also sort of seeking the public support of the employees, or words to that effect. That we are different than other employers because we also are seeking the votes of our employees. I think that's the way he put it. Is that not similar - and I'm not doing more than to ask the point that he made - with the City of Winnipeg aldermen who employ the civil service in the city who are members of a union? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR.

JORGENSON : The Minister was not in his seat when I dealt with that particular aspect, and perhaps I'd better invite him to read my comments when he has the opportunity, and I'm sure he will do that since he knows now that I have been dealing with the comments that he made in this debate. But, Sir, what concerns me about the provisions of the bill is the overt, partisan activity by the public servant while in public service, for such activity must inevitably lead to a confusion of roles. I don't know how it can be otherwise.

On the one hand, the public servant seeks to do what the public bid them to do, and on the other he seeks to in fluence the public in its decisions as to what it will have him do. Given the supremacy of the government as a legal inst itution, Sir, it has immense coercive powers, whether it is actively employed or not; and when its employees are engaged in partisan political activities we move closer to the position where those coercive powers can be employed, whether they are cam paigning or not.

I am of course aware that what the government is arguing is that such acti vity will be open to all its employees, and I realize that that's been the burden of their position, and some of these may not be supporters of the government of the day. But that argument is an attempt, Sir, to side-step the issue, because there are two points that can be made about this particular argument. Let's consid er the analogy that the Minister has drawn, with a normal employer/employee relationship.

I suggest to him that if the employees of a corporation were engaged in activities directed at the shareholders of the corporation with the object thereby to shape or change the policy of the management of the corporation, the shareholders might legitimately wonder what was going on. And their confusion, their uncertainty and their doubt, it seems to me, would be perfectly legitimate, whether the employees were agitating on behalf of the management or against it. Of course, some employees will support the opposition; we're aware of that. No matter what party's in power.

Government employees working overtly for an opposition are not likely to intimi date voters, because they know that no real coercive power exists with the opposition. The power of intimid ation, however subtle, however innocent, and however

115 0 March 7, 1974 BILL 7 (MR. JORGENSON cont'd) ..... unintent ional, can never be absent when civil servants are actively engaged in partisan activities for the government, of whatever party.

The magnitude of government grants and benefits are far too great; the dependence on government busines s, direct or indirect, too great; and the protection of the public servant within the Civ il Service is too great for there not to be a real and present dan ger that government employees who en gage in partisan activity for a government party will exert influence of a kind that may have little to do with the merits of their case, and much to do with the fact that they are perceived to be agents of the government. Well, Sir, this is the case of the opposition parties.

What I've attempted to do is to make the difference between the civil servant running as a candidate in an election on the one hand, and a civil servant engaging in activities during the course of an election campaign, activities which we feel, Sir, will do great harm to the Ci vil Service, will be able to exert an tindue amount of pressure on behalf of the government in power, whatever government that may be. For that reason, Sir, we oppose this bill. As my friend the Member for Ri el stated, there is much in this bill to co mmend its passage.

There are sections of this bill that I think will do a great deal of harm to the Ci vil Service of this country. We must reject it on that basis, because surely to accept it as a principle would be interpreted by the Minister of Finance, if no one else, as being in favour of something of that which we are not in favour of.

For that reason I regret very much the Minister of Labour did not use the opportunity, and he had unlimited time to use that, did not use the opportunity of saying something about this bill that would lead us to believe there's a reasonable degree of hope that the government were prepared to accept a modification or change of direction in that particular aspect of the legislation. The debate, I presume now, because of the failure on the part of the Mini ster will contin ue for some time to come. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney- General. MR .

P A WLEY: I wonder if the Honourable Member from Morris would be prepared to answer my question now. The honourable member in referring to the Civil Service Co mmissi on and use of patronage referred to the case of one Keith Robs on, and suggested that he in fact had been appointed because of political patronage; is the honourable member aware of the fact that this same Keith Robson that he refers to was a Progressive Conservative candidate who ran in the constituency ! now represent against my immediate predecessor, Mr. T. P. Hillhouse. MR .

JORGENSON: The Minister, th e Attorney-General has a capacity of asking irrele vant questions . I really don't give a damn whether he was a Conservative at that time or now, the man is an opportunist whether he calls himself a Conser vative, a Liberal or a Socialist. It has really nothing to do with the particular case. He believed in establishing a monopoly for the government. The Minister of Agri culture saw in him a tool with which he could achieve what he believes in, and appointed him for that purpose rather than an appointment coming through the Ci vil Service.

He was appointed for one purpose, and that is to achieve the aims and the ambitions and the desires of the Minister of Agriculture. That's the reason he's there - by-passing the Ci vil Service. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR . MARION: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is not my intention, Mr. Speaker, to prolong the debate unnecessa rily but I think that a great case-- (lnterjection) --1 have a booster in the House, thank you, the Honourable Minister of Finance.

I think that this side of the House has made a very cons iderable case with respect to the inherent problems that can arise from accepting this bill. I think that the underlying principle - and I will be generous in all of my remarks to the honourable gentlemen on the other side - the underlying principle of this bill is personal freedom, or is it ? How many injustices have been perpetrated in the name of free dom, and I think that this is a question that is really relevant.

We don't have to go very far, it was last year where a bill was introduced giving the right to strike to every worker in this province, even: those engaged in strategic services. We are now faced with a situation where this will prove to have been: a very illogical kind of legislation. What was wrong with the sys tem as it was before where there was mandatory concilia tion that was binding on both parties, and where injustices could not be perpetrated upon those who are bargaining. I think, Mr. Speaker, that that question is relevant and there have been in the name of freedom a number of injustices perpetrated.

I think that my honourable friend from Morris made quite a case of the very specific position occupied by members of the Civ il Service. It is not difficult to agree that a civil

March 7, 1974 1151 BILL 7 (MR. MARION cont'd) ..... servant is not an employee like any other kind of employee. I think that he has a very sacred trust. He works for an ever-changing employer, one who con stantly is on the move to obtain favors of all of the citizens of the province. By that very nature the employee of the Ci vil Service has to be very careful of not being, or not showing too much favoritism to the government of the day for fear of being discri minated against by ensuing governments .

And I think, Sir, that the legislation that is being brought before us today is one that has all of those dangerous connota tions. I think that if you liken the government to an ordinary employer you will find that there are very very vast differences, yet in the bill we find that in some sections the Executive Council is taking over in essence, if I liken the Executive Commi ttee to the president of a company, it is taking over active management of every depart ment, and I feel that this is completely wrong.

I think that the government of the day is there to set policies and direction to what should be done for the welfare of the res idents , the citizens of the province. It's not there to administer those policies but rather to set them. I think that in private enterprise the president sets the guidelines and does not communica te directly with employees. This is another point that is weak in the amendments that are being brought where directly you find the Executive Co mmittee coming into contact with the employee-- (Interjection)- by of course weakening the Ci vil Service Commiss ion. I think it's difficult, Mr.

Spea ker, to voice all of the dangers that are inherent, all of the dangers that are inhe rent in providing thi s ultimate freedom. I think that one's position in society has a tampering effect on his freedom, what is good for one is not necessarily good for another; and I think that I don't have to come up with concrete examples of what I mean, we can look at the various vocations in this world and we can see for ourselves that there are those who can permit themselves some liberties in areas because of their very selection, or their very walk of life, where others can not permit themselves those same liberties.

I think that this analogy stands with respect to the Ci vil Service. I believe in freedom of the individual be he where he might find himself, but I think that having said what I have just said it is impossible to apply that freedom holus bolus and to per mit everyone to offer himself the same liberties. I use as an example: in this bill we find that a deputy minister does not have the same options as are afforded to everyone else. That is a stringent yet realistic approach.

The deputy minister being involved in applying the policies that are set by government, the government of the day, is so directly intertwined with the pol itical process that it was wise that he be refrained from taking on this active and positive free dom that is advocated by the bill. I wonder if we go far enough, Sir ? I wonder if there are not other department heads that don't have the same status as a deputy minister who should also, because of the very nature of their position, be withheld that complete freedom of being a bag man or of runnin g for office.

I think that the tremendous importance of the Civil Service to the inhabitants of our pro vince is one that I don't have to lend credence to, it's totally evident. And I think that for that very reason it's important that we protect that sacred trust of a civil servant. It is in my opinion probably very wise to offer all of the freedom and the latitude that is possible to give to employees of the Ci vil Service.

But I think it is important too that if we have withdrawn this privilege from deputy ministers let's look into all of the other classifications of employees that we have, and let's adjudicate where it should be permissible and where it shouldn't be permis sible.

I think that it was the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources who said that if he showed a preference for a union or a group - yes a union - be it MGEA over CUPE or vice versa, he felt that that very preference that he would show could have countervailing effects on the deci sions that would be made by the syndica tes, and I thought that that was a very reasonable com ment to make, and I completely endors e that comment. I think that the comment is applicable in essence to what I am trying to say now.

I think that there is no doubt that there are those who can en joy complete freedom within the Ci vil Service and not really have an effect on the proper functioning of that service. Yet there are those that if they do run for office, or if they do become partisan, and for any party - I am trying to walk the middle of the road; I am trying to say that these dangers would exist for any and all parties in office at the day. I think that there is an analogy there, and I think that it would be dangerous if we didn't evalue very care fully where the freedom of options, the total freedom of options are made available.

11 52 March 7, 197 4 BILL 7 (MR. MARION cont'

d) I'm afraid that if - and I would use this as an example - I'm afraid that if you had a depart ment head, not a deputy minister I'll grant but a department head, who was actively supporting a party, and taking all of the measures necess ary to show that he 's actively supporting that party, if he had employees under him I would humbly suggest, Sir, that thes e employees would be without doubt intimidated and they would not certainly openly profess their politica l belief. I think that this becomes a dangero-us thing to have in the Ci vil Service.

I think that merit rating is one that was cons idered and brought out by some of our mem bers , some of the members on this side of the House, and I think that it should be certainly one of the base criteria used when giv ing increases in responsibility to an employee.

And I would be very much afraid that if in the Civi l Service you had holus bolus people professin g political faiths, you would then be mini mizing to a very great degree the importance of merit rating, and you would in essence be say ing if you are of the politica l faith of the government of the day you have all of the possibilities to attain whatever goal you want irrespective of the real potential that you have in the Service, and I think that this is certainly not going to stand the ci tiz ens of our province in good stead.

I thought from the outset, or from the outset when I looked at the bill, that there were two basic principles that were being announ ced. On the one hand there was the principle that em ployees should have complete freedom to do as they will. Now I won't lend any more arguments to this side or to that principle, I think it has been well stated that it is utopic and not really in keepin g with all of the other facts of life in the world of today. I think the second principle that has been, or is being enunciated in the bill, is the one with respect to the powers of the Executive Committee. Basi cally, Mr.

Speaker, I think that we are effe ctively emasculating the Civil Service Commission, which in essence should have the complete authority on adjudi cating responsibilities, setting up job descriptions, providing for increments, providing for promotions within the Ci vil Service. I think that all of these powers should be vested in the Ci vil Service Commiss ion, and what we see in this bill is none other than removing from that Ci vil Service Commiss ion all powers that are at all meanin gful and vestin g them in the Executive Committee.

Now as I mentioned earlier on this is tanta mount of saying, if you make the analogy of private enter prise and government, and I realize that there are very basic differences and I used them as part of my argument in talking about freedom within the Ci vil Service, but if we nonethel ess make the comparison it would seem to me that a president then would in a large corporation be talking to each and every one of his employees about his responsibilities and his potential. Now this is ju st absolutely impossible and improbable.

The only thing that makes it possible for government is the fact that there are a vast number of members in the government - in the government of today there are 31 - each of which has his own executive and they might number anywhere up to 35 or 40, so when you multiply--th e executive of his constituency I'm talking about--and if you multiply this you have a tre mendous number of potential bosses will ing to interfere with the process of the Ci vil Service Commission. I think that this is not a desi rable factor. I think that surely this

section of the Act, and there are specifica lly two sections in my opinion that merit a great deal of study and a great deal of revamping and are not acceptable to anyone on this side, and they will have to certainly be amended in large part before we are able to accept that this is the kind of Ci vil Service Act that we want for the Province of Manitoba. If the executive committee has the total and final word at every government change, could you imagine the wholesale slaughter of employees that would happen every time the government changed hands ?

Well I think that-- I don't --i t' s been stressed, this case has been made, and I can see that except those people --(I nterj ectio n) -- I see that I have a friend that 's supporting me in my argument. I can see that there would be wholesale changes and we would be slaughtering, in essence, all of those who would honestly like to make a career of the Ci vil Service and who have the qualifications to make the Civil Service or to keep the Civil Service at the level of potential that it has today, at the level of performance that it has today.

I can't help but thank the Honourable Minister of Labour for one co mment that he made today. It was a comment that was much apprecia ted when he said, "I would undertake to accept reasonable amendments when this bi ll is br ought ... "--the Minister shakes his hand and I am trying to keep my cool, Mr. Speaker. MR . PAULLEY: If the honourable member would just qualify that by saying I would con si der them.

March 7, 1974 1153 BILL 7 MR. DEPUTY SPE AKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. MARION: Well I will even accept that. Thank you, Honourable Minister of Labour. I think that this is a new turn of events because in yesterday's debate there was no question that the Minister was adamant about the bill should stand as he was presenting it. I'm pleased, I'm indeed pleased, and this is the only reason whereby I could in conscience support that it now be sent to Committee for further study and amending.

I think that there were some comments made a while ago by the Honourable Member from Morris where he realize d and he underscored the fact that there are some good points brought out in the bill, and I think that I would like to add my feelings along the same line, that there are certai nly some good points in the bill and it would be a shame for us to lose all of the potential, worthy amendments that are being brought to the Ci vil Service Act, and that is the reason that I am compelled, because of those good points, I am compelled to let it go to Law Amendmen ts. This means that-- (Inte rject ion) - Pardon ?

With a great deal of reservation. But this only means that when it is being studied at that level we are indeed going to br ing forth amendments and we will cer tainly not let the bill be railroaded through without making our point and stress ing the validity of the amendments that we make. I think it will be our job not to obstruct but to offer some very constructive criticism.

This we intend to do, and again I voice the co mments that were made by my col leagues of the Liberal Party that we support the bill with grave reservations, and we will make those reservations or we will expand on those reservations when it comes to the Law Amend ments Committee. MR . DEPUTY SPE AKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Roblin, that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Bill No. 15,

an Act to amend The Queen 's Bench Act. MR . PAULLEY : Stand, Mr. Speaker? (Agreed) BILL NO. 16 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Bill No. 16,

an Act to amend The County Courts Act. The Honourable Member for Birtle-Ru ssell. MR . GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When the Honourable Attorney-General intro duced Bills Nos. 15 and 16, he told us in some respect that they were bills of very similar nature and I fully concur with what he said in that respect.

The Bill No. 15 dealt with The Queen 's Bench Act and this one deals with The County Courts Act, and if the Honourable Attorney-General would read the comments that I made on Bill 15, there is no need for me again to reiterate at this time the comments that I made at that time, which in essence were a layman's suggestion put forward for debate, that maybe we should be lookin g in the future to wards having a common court rather than a distinction between the Queen 's Bench and the County Courts. Mr.

Speaker, when the Minister gave this bill second--or intro duced it for second reading, some of the comments he made were to the effect that much of this was in effect house-cl eaning amendments and those that are in that category I fully concur. Since the government last year established the office of a Chief County Court Judge, natur ally there has to be some amend ments spelling out that position in the Act where it so applies .

One of the other suggested changes is the one dealing with the acceptance of certified mail as well as registered mail, and if the Minister can indicate to me that certified mail moves faster than registered mail, well I'll accept that as well. It is my own personal observation, Mr. Speaker, that mail of any kind, whether it be male or female, does not move too fast once it gets into the govern ment channels. A MEMBER: You got that eh, Wally ? You got that, eh ? MR. GRAHAM: We have something else though, Mr. Speaker, in here that did cause me a great deal of concern. This was a

section which the Minister is introducing which deals with the resid ency of judges. Now it's quite proper, I guess, that there are certain people in this Province of Manitoba that members of the Legisla ture want to specify the exact location of their residence, and I would suggest that one of th ose people is probably the Li eutenant Governor. We do have a Li eutenant- Governor's resid ence in the province and I think we can expect that he should live in that residence. Likewise at the other end of the spectrum,

11 54 March 7 , 1974 BILL 16 (MR. GRAHAM cont'd ) ..... Mr. Speaker, there are some people who have been incarcera ted for various violations of the law where we can expect to designate the resid ence for those people for a certain length of tim e' But I notice that here the Attorney-General is attempting to spell out the resid ential area of the Chi ef Judge and he suggests that the Chief County Court Judge shall reside within the Eastern Judi cia l District. Mr.

Speaker, we for quite a number of years on this side have expressed our concern about centralization in the Province of Manitoba; we have suspected that government, in any manner that they want to choose, will endeavour to bring all the powers into one central area, and that in doing so they may very well endanger the other areas of the Province of Manitoba. Here again, we find an action of that nature where we are attempting by legisla tion to enforce the residency of the Chie f County Court Judge in the central area or the urban area of Manitoba. And I don't think that we should have that right.

Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, it wouldn't bother me at all if the Chief County Court Judge lived in Portage la Prairie; it wouldn't bother me at all. It wouldn't bother me if he lived in Brandon; it wouldn't bother me if he lived in Thompson. But I don 't think that we have the right to dictate that he should live in the Eastern Judi cial District. I don't think the Attorney-General really wants that right. Maybe when he's closing debate he will tell us why he wants that right for him. If we profess to live in a free soci ety, Mr.

Speaker, then I think we must have the free dom of movement of indiv iduals; as much as is humanly possible that we should attempt to refrain from impinging on the ri ghts of the indivi dual to live in an area of his choice, in a com mun ity of his own choosin g, and if he particula rly likes to live in Churchill, then why should we try and sto p that ?-- (Interj ection ) --Yes . Mr.

Speaker, there are many people in today's society who co mmute 50, 60, 70 miles daily and I consider that they do a fairly good job, so I would like the Minister, when he is clos ing debate on this bill, to explain to us exactly why he wants the Chief Justice to live in the Eastern Judi cia l District. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister will be closin g debate. The Attorne y-General. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, there a number of points that have been raised and, as the Member for Bir tl e-Rus sell stated, he was rei terating the comments which he had made in res pect to the introduction of Bill 15, the one dealing with The Queen 's Bench Act, insofar as the need for two separate courts. I want to first, of course, indicate that this is a matter which is of federal nature, a consti tutional question insofar as the development of the court system and separated between the Queen 's Bench and the County Court.

I think it can be reasonably stated that over the past number of years there has been a gradual assumption of greater jurisdict ion by the County Court. For instance, a few years ago we saw the inc rease in different areas that the County Court was able to deal with, inc luding an increase in the amount of the sums for which one could undertake action within the County Court for collection of moneys and damages .

I would say to the honourable member that in principle there is no strong reason for bein g of the opinion that this present divis ion between County Court and Queen 's Bench need neces sarily contin ue into an infinite type of future. The Law Reform Commiss ion, Dominion level, has been interested in this entire question of the division of the courts into Queen's Bench and County Court, and are presently analyzing this, I gather, and it has been argued in different circles that there is no practical reason to contin ue the division of one court from another.

But again let me repeat that this is a federal matter and does not really reflect upon the substance of the amendments before us. Insofar as the cer tified mail and registered mail is concerned, I am advise d--of course certified mail, as we all know here, is a new innovation of the post office brought in during the past year. It is sim ilar to registered mail although it is cheaper and more convenient. With cer tified mail the sender obtains packages which are obtained from the post office. As with registered mail, the receiver of the mail signs a form acknowledging recei pt or proof of delivery.

In this way once a certified mail package has been purchased from the post office, everythin g can be done from the office of the clai mant or from the court office. In particu lar there is no requirement, as with registered mail, for an attendance to be made at the post office for the letter to be stamped and the particulars inscribed in some record book. The third matter raised was in respect to residence. I think there is a very sound and practica l reason for inserting within the legisla tion that each judge will in fact live within the judicia l district in which that judge has received his commission for.

A judge has to be avail able at pretty well any time for emergency situations, emergency services, calls, night calls, injunct ions, bail, which are required to be dealt with on a very quick basis, expeditiou s basis,

March 7, 1974 1155 BILL 16 (MR. PAWLEY cont'd) ..... and certainly the judge for the Weste

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	30-1-43
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	30th 1st hansardpdf 43.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	76395f96f7ee0f8294c79aa7e0267e5e76dec7cb

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