Manitoba Hansard — 2 July 1986 (Sitting 37, 33rd Legislature, 1st Session)

33-1-37

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 2 July, 1986. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAK ER, Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Pr ese nting Reports by Stand ing and Specia l Committees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Emplo yment Services. HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure to table the Annual Report of the Workplace Innovation Centre for the fiscal year ended March 3 1, 1986. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of High ways. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Yes, Madam Speak er, I have a statement. I am pleased to announce today that we have just received word from Lloyds of London that the efforts of the Government of Manitoba, with assistance from Transport Canad a, have resulted in an amended "Churchill Clause" regarding hull insurance premiums. The London underwriters have ratified a new Churchill Clause, effective immedia tely , to include many of the suggestions made during our meetings with them including: 1.

A specific window for the ice-free season dating from August 15 and extending to October 15. lt is anticipated that this "open window," with low insurance premiums, will allow Churchill to achieve the desired state of par ity , regarding insurance, with other trading ports; 2. A reduction in additional premiums to a flat 15 percent of the annual premium during the ice-free "window" period, from the previous 30 percent for ice-strengthened ships, and as high as 50 percent for conventional ships.

This will cut the applicable insurance premium for a voyage to Churchill at least in half and make it comparable with other ports where additional premiums apply. lt is anticipated that these insurance reductions will act as an impetus to increasing commodity movements . from Churchill; 3. A specific requi rement for compl iance with NORDREG advice by all vessels navigating to and from the Port of Churchill to ensure the safest passage for those vessels traversing the Churchill route; 4.

For those sailings preceding or surpa ssing the "window" dates, insurance will be allocated, by underwriters, on a "case-by- case" basis with no arbitrary cutoff dates, and instead of the flat addit ional premium regardless of the risks involved, as was previously the case. I am pleased to state that this amended Churchill Clause has major implications, not only to those vessels utili zing the port, but to th e people of Churchill themselves.

This achievement, I believe, not only recognizes and establishes Churchill as a safe port, but is indicative of this government's commitme nt to developing both Churchill and Canada's North. This achie vement marks not the final step but rather the beginning of our efforts to realize the true potential of Churchill and our Canadian North. The new Chur chill Cla use will als o serve to complement projects initia ted under the Churchill Sub Agreement, Madam Speaker.

These projects include the development of a prototype grain car designed with northern rail conditions in mind, and the establishme nt of a hydro line from Gillam to Churchill. This line will provide benefits to Manitobans in terms of service and will also provide an advantage in the form of energy cost savings at Churchill. Other projects on stream for Churchill are dredging of the harbour and construction of a tugboat for use at the port. 1t is particularly pleasing to me to see that the Manitoba Government 's vision for Churchill is now being witnessed by all Manitobans in substantive terms.

These rewards, Madam Speak er, and recognition of Manitoba efforts also serve as a testimony to the continued promotion and development of the Port of Churchill. Our government is committed to that development and we intend to continue the pa th towards the establishment of a major role for Churchill in Canad a's port system. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Madam Speak er.

I would suggest that today's announcement is one of an ongoing series of developments over the past number of years for the Port of Churchill which will and should bode well for future use in the Port of Churchill for grain shi pments out and possibly even for other commodity shi pments in. it's interesting to note, Madam Speaker, that the open window extension by Lloyds of London, in terms of their insurance rate, gives us now a three-month - if my numbers are correct - open shipping season whereby the insurance premiums will be somewhat more moderate than what they were in the past.

I think it's fair to say that the initial test that a longer season was available in the Port in Churchill came about in 1979 when the MV Arctic Canadian reinforced hull ship was in after the proposed closing date and picked up its cargo and navigated the straits without any difficulty after the official closing date of the shipping season and provided that kind of proof that an extended season was indeed available. 1388

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 It's also interesting to not e that if one were to check the archi ves of the Hudson 's Bay Company , you will find that wooden sailing ships, as long ago as 250 years in our history, used the port facilities at the mouth of the Nelson River for almost a five-and-one -half month period during those early fur-trading days. It would seem to me that although memories may not - most memories don't remember that , but some of my colleagu es have indicated they rememb er it well , Madam Speaker .

But , Madam Speaker, that historical fact always led credibility to the argument that Churchill indeed could have a much extended season , although the insurance premiums were used as a reason for not extending the season .

It wasn't the major imped iment to a greater use of the Port of Churchill, and certainly the reduction in premiums will assist in defraying that argument against the use of Churchill as a shipp ing port, but more important to the future of Churchill are the federal backed initiatives of dredging to extend the draft line of ships coming into use the facility , so larger ships can take cargo there more times of the year; indeed , the provision of a new tugboat; and indeed provision of the hydro-electric line are probably more important single factors that have been achieved in cooperation and dedication from the Federal Government , which has seen Churchill as a port of opportunity in Northern Manitoba.

I think that certainly credit is to be given to the lowering of the insurance premiums , but it is but one piece of a puzzle in the ongoing negotiations to make Churchill a viable port which all levels of government , including the Local Government of Churchill , have been involved in; certainly the Federal Government has been extremely involved in providing funds to make Churchill a longer season , more viable port.

We will certainly support, on this side of the House , efforts, as we always have, in cooperation with the Federal Government, to make sure that they put Churchill down as one of their priority ports, as they did in 1979 and will work with this government in achieving further gains for the Port of Churchill to give it a solid future in grain shipping from the Prairies, Madam Speaker . Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Cultural Affairs . HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Madam Speaker , I'm pleased to table the Annual Report for the Manitoba Women 's Directorate for the year 1985-86.

MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motion I wonder if the Provincial Govern ment has been informed, directly by the company, of the very disturbin g news of John Deere's withdrawal from the deal with respect to the purchase of Versatil e Corporation. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , we have been advised by Versatile insofar as the present situation is concerned: the request for a reasonab le period of time to obtain a buyer on the part of Versatile; the notifica tion on the part of John Deer e; and the desire on the part of the Versatile to complete the transaction after a search is undertaken; and also hoping to restore interest on the part of John Deere if, in fact , a sear ch is unsuccessful. MR. G.

FILMON: Has the Premier had any direct communication, other than the letter that he tabled last week with the John Deere Company , in respect to this disturbing news of their withdrawal from the deal? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I have no response from John Deere pursuant to the letter that was forwarded to them, or the telex, on Thursday of last week , a nd neither has the Minister of Industry and Technology received a response. I forwarded a further telex to the Prime Minister dated June 27 of this year asking a furth er effort on the part of the Prime Minister in respect to this serious matter. MR. G.

FILMON: I wonder if the Premier will attempt to set up a meeting to meet personally with the officials of John Deere to att empt to pursuade them to continue in their efforts to purchase Versatile. I might indicate that, on a non-partisan basis , I would be happy to lend whatever support I could on behalf of my colleagues, many of whom represent the farm community and, indeed , the constituency in which Versatile is located. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , I certainly am prepar ed to take any suggestions under consideration, including the one by the Leader of the Opposition .

I would, as well , like to receive a response from the Prim e Minister in respect to specific requests that I made to him on Frid ay as to efforts that could be taken by the Federal Government in an effort to ensure , Madam Speaker, that every effort be undertaken, both provincially and federally, to permit the transacti on to be completed. I'll take the suggestion under advisement, though , as I think it is a constructive one . Introduction of Bills . .

Versatile Farm Equipment Company - ORAL QUESTIONS Versatile Farm Equipment Company - John Deere's withdrawal to purchase MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Premier . 1389 layoffs MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , I'd point out that in the past the Premier has travelled to the United States with respect to the hog issue and with respect to nuclear waste , and I would think that in Manitoba 's interests that this would be a very key issue , given the potential loss of 1,200 jobs.

On that particular matter, I might ask the Premier whether or not Versatile has officially notified the province with respect to the potential layoff whi ch , as

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 I understand, by July 21 will result in a total closure of the plant? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mad am Speaker, I indicate I would take the suggestion under consideration , because I do believe that insofar as the Garrison issue , when the Minister responsible for Labour undertook the effort to ensure there would be a joint representation, it was worthwhile, and I think that joint effor t helped considerably . I would want to , of course, consult with Versatile to ensure that, in their view , this would be constructive considering the circumstances. MR. G.

FILMON: I wonder if the Premier can indicate whether or not the government has been informed about the layoff which, as I understand it, will result in almost a total closure of the plant as of July 21. Versatile Farm Equipment Company - alternate purchasers MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speake r. We have been informed - I should tell the Leader of the Opposition that the problem with the sale , of course, is not John Deere; the problem with the sale is the U.S.

Justice Department which has issued a ruling requiring Versatile to find a diffe rent purchaser . What they have not done is set a specific time-line , but past practice has indicated that is 90 days . The discussions going on right now, and the reason why it was so crucial , and the reason why we asked the Governm ent of Canada to become involved , and our ambassador, again, in Washington last week to become involved again was that we wanted to have the Justi ce Department rule that June 30 would be the reasona ble date to have done the search, and in that event the sale would have proceeded.

The terms of the agreem ent were that if the sale was not consumm ate d by June 30, there would be no agreement. The arrangement now, as Versatile has indicate d to us, and I believe to the public, is that they will proce ed to look for buyers. They have hired a merchant banking firm to look throughout the world for purchasers, but at the same time they are attempting to get a definition from the U.S. Just ice Depart men t of the time required - and they are hoping to keep that at a very short period .

Once that time period is over is the time when one can deal with John Deere, up until that point , John Deere is, by lega l definition , out of it because the agreement has expired, No. 1; and , No. 2, Versat ile has been instructed by the Justice Department to find another purchase r, and that's what they are attempting to do right now. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , I wonder if the Premier has offered , on behalf of the government, to be involved with Versatile in their search for any alternate purchasers . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister .

HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, on Friday I had several di scussion s with Mr. Soubry of Versatile and offered to Mr. Soubry any assistance th at could be provided by the Government of the Province of Manitoba in any area th at could help the com pletion of the sale . MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, given that many of the parts and other aspects of the manufacture of Versatile equipment also originate in Manitoba, does the province have an estimate as to how many spinoff or related jobs are tied into the Versati le closure? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. HON. V.

SCHROEDER: It's our information that up to 600-700 people will be affected by the notice by midsummer. Versatile Farm Equipment Company - labour agreement MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, given that den Oudsten , the Dutch firm that is supposed to be purchasing Flyer, is wanting to renegotiate the labour agreement with respect to Flyer, is there any indication on the part of John Deere that there is a concern on their part to renegotiate the labour agreement at Versatile ? HON. V. SCHROEDER: None whatsoever , Madam Speaker .

University of Manitoba - effect of cutbacks MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you , Madam Speaker . My question is to the Minister of Education . Given the fact that there has been a shortfall in funding to the University of Manitoba , and it's bee n reported that there has been a series of cutbacks in both staff and in the courses being offered for the upcoming fall season , could the Minister advise us the number of staff that will be laid off and the number of programs or courses that would be discontinued at the university?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Ministe r of Business Development . HON. M. HEMPHILL: Madam Speaker, I don 't have the exact detail s of the informa tion that the member is requesting here with me, but I will get them for him. and respond as soon as possible . MR. C. BIRT: As the Acting Minister is taking that question as notice , perhaps she could take the following as notice as well . 1390

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 Could she advise the House, as it relates to the Faculty of Science and any other faculties, the number of departments that will be closed, and the number of any labs or ancillary wor k that also would have to be terminated because of the sho rtf all in funding? HON. M. HEMP HILL: Yes, Madam Speaker, I will. MR. C. BIRT: Would the Min ister also take under advisement and advise the House whether she, in her acting capacity, or the Minister of Education , will be meeting with the University of Manitoba to see what steps can be taken to remedy their problems? HON. M.

HEMPHILL: Yes, Madam Speaker, I think the Minister of Education has indicated in this House, on a number of occasions, that he's prepared to meet with any groups or organizations, university or school boards, that are having diffic ulties or want to discus s educational matters with him. So I'm sure, in this case, that if they request a meeting, he would be willing to meet with them too.

At the same time , I recall some discussion by him, in terms of recognizing that the universities themselves make their budget decisions , make their program decisions, are given an overall budget allocation by the government, and recognizing what that amount of money is going to be, have to make some priority decisions about what programs they will keep and what will go. I do believe that in a previous question, just last week, he indicated he had some concerns about some of the decisions that were being made and was attempting to set up a meeting with the University of Manitoba to discuss them.

Manitoba Development Centre - Physical Activities Building contract deadline MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. E. CONNERY: Thank you, Madam Speaker, to the Minister of Community Services . During the Community Services Estimates , the Minister said that the 2.7 Activities Building would be ready for sometime in mid-1987. I know that tenders have been issued . When is the deadline for signing a contract for the construction of that facility? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services . HON. M.

SMITH: Madam Speaker, the managemen t of the building construction and the tendering process is under Government Services. However, I can undertake to get that information , but I think it's more appropriately directed to the Minister of Government Services. MR . E. CONNERY: It is my information, Mada m Speaker, that the deadline was June 30. MADAM SPEAKER: Question? 1391 MR. E. CONNERY: Yes. Is this true; was the deadline June 30 for the issuing of a contract for the building of that facility? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Government Services. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, I believe that it is currently in its final approval stages and it will be issued very shortly. I'm not certai n that I can confirm that date. It's possible , very often, that extensions are negotiated or included , if that date was indeed firm, but I will check that , Madam Speaker . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. E. CONNERY: Yes, Madam Speaker, is there a danger now that because the government has been dragging their feet and proceeding at the speed that they are, will they guarantee that the facility will be ready by mid-summer of 1987? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, there has been no dragging of feet by the government. The government has been moving expeditiously on this matter and we will continue to do so. As far as the commitment on the date, again I would have to determine wheth er there are any unforeseen eventualities that have come up in the negotiations for the final tendering. If there was some add itional work that had to be included, after the tender was put out , this sometimes lead s to some unforeseen delays, but we would make every effor t to complete the project as scheduled.

Anstett, Andy - attendance at municipal meetings MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member fo r Sp ringfield . MR. G. ROCH : Th ank you, Madam Sp ea ker. My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs - and I'll heed a little advice you sent me there a week ago .

Could the Minister tell the House , when the defeated former Minist er of Municipal Affairs becam e overn ight a so-called consultant and was hired by his former colleagues to write a so-called report on municipal infrastructures in Manitob a - I believe that 's what it's being called officially anyways - at a cost to the taxpayers of Manitoba of $55,000 plus expenses, I was wond ering , Madam Speaker , could the Minister tell the House , do the terms of reference of his so-called contract include attending district meetings of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Aff airs. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: Yes, I'm very pleased indeed that we have a person of the competency of Mr. Anstett to help develop the fund for rural development . Mr. Anstett is free to attend any meetings whatsoever to meet with people who are in a position to provide him

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 with some idea of the needs of rural Manitoba and, indeed, I'm pleased that he's been able to attend some of these meetings. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. I think the honourable member 's so-called question , we should listen to the so-called answer . The Honourable Member for Springfield. MR. G. ROCH: Well, then, Madam Speak er, one can assume that he is being reimbursed . MADAM SPEAKER: Question. MR. G. ROCH: Yes, yes. He 's being reimbursed for his mileage and expenses by the taxpayers.

Why then is it that the only UMM meeting that he attended happened to be the one held in the eastern district? Is it because the constituen cy of Springfield is located there? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please , order please . The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. HON. J. BUCKLASCHUK: I'm disappo inted to see that the Opposition's research hasn't improved over the previous years . In fact, Mr. Anstett also attended the meeting at Arborg, and he may have attended other mee ti ngs as well ; so , clearly , Lac du Bonnet was not the only district meeting that he attended.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Springfield with a final supplementary . MR. G. ROCH: Well , it's a new question to the First Minister. Given the fact that his position of $55,000 a year plus expenses seems to be add ing more in a phony public campaign for re-e lection . MADAM SPEAKER: Question . MR. G. ROCH: Well, this is a new question; I'm giving a

preamble . To me it was blatantly obvious at that meeting, and as he practically controlled . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order, order please. Does the honourable member have a question? MR. G. ROCH: Yes, I do. MADAM SPEAKER: Question period is a time to ask questions, not deliver information. MR. G. ROCH: Okay then, Madam Speaker . My question is then will other candidates in Springfield , indeed in Manitoba, also be paid 55,000 a year plus expenses to campaign for re-election ? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , ju st as I have made no criticism of the appointment of the Federal Government of the defeated Conservati ve candidate in Lac du Bonnet, Mr. Darren Praznik, to work on behalf of the Minister of Health and Social Servic es in th e Province o f Mani toba, I am sur prised that the Honourable Member for Springfield wo uld make criticism of as talented and able an individual as Mr. Anstett to carry on work on behalf of the Provincial Government . If he wants to talk about defeated candidates, he can talk as well about the defeated Conservative candidate in Lac du Bonnet. MR. G.

ROCH: To the First Mini ster. There 's a differ ent level of government involved here. Aren 't you aware of it? He may not be aware . Will the First Minister give an answer to my question , yes or no? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Would the honourable member mind repeating his question. I have difficulty in hearing the honourable member . MR. G. ROCH: There seems to be trouble in memories across the floor over there in many cases .

I was wondering if the other candidates in Springfield and, indeed, in other places in Manitoba would also be paid $55 ,000 a year plus expenses to campaign for re-election or election , whatever the case may be. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I don't know how many other defeated Conservative candidates throughout the province may also be appointed to high ranking positions in respect to the federal Civil Service. If they are able and if they are qualified, I would hope some of them would be appointed just as, Madam Speaker, we intend to appoint qualified people to work for this government .

University of Manitoba - Women faculty member cuts MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights . MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is to the Minister responsible for the Status of Women. In the 50 positions that will be cut at the University of Manitoba that we know of to date , many of them will be women , is her department taking an interest in preserving affirmative action at the university with regard to a lack of cutting of women in these faculty positions?

MADAM SPEAKER: Could the honourable member please rephrase her question to make sure that it's within the administrative responsibili ty of the Minister? MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. 1392 The faculty cuts at the University of Manitoba will involve a ·great number of women . As it is one of her

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 mandates to be concerned about affirmative action programs for women, I'm therefore concerned that she indicate whether her department will be taking an interest. Will the ministry responsible for the Status of Women involve themselves in discussions with the Univ ersity of Manitoba in order to protect women's positions at that university? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister responsible for the Status of Women . HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Thank you, Madam Speaker .

As my colleague, the Minister of Education, indicated on Thursday, June 26, this government is concerned about any cutbacks that single out women 's studies . We will be trying to ascertain the exact nature of the cuts at the University of Manitoba , sitting down and discussing with representatives of the university , and looking very seriously at their proposal for the women's chair for the two universities . MRS . S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker , the question wasn't about women 's studies . I repeat the question . There are a number of faculties, including arts , science and engineering , that are cutting.

Will the Minister involve herself in discussions to make sure that those faculty members who are women are protected? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you , Madam Speaker. The Member for River Heights, I think bases her question on two assumptions that are not quite accurate . The first is, Madam Speaker, that the University of Manitoba is an autonomous body. They received some 3 percent operating funding. They are making those decisions in terms of the courses , the sections of courses, which are to be amalgamated or whatever on their own .

They are also, Madam Speaker , as is the Member for River Heights, committed to affirmative action . I'm sure that any decisions that come about , and I should indicate that there have been very few final determinations made with respect to courses o r positions, when they make those decisions, I am sure that they will also be taking the majority of point of view that affirmative action is something that is a commitment of the government and the universities and I believe our community as a whole.

I'm sure they' ll be taking that into consideration before they make any final decisi on as to staffing and whom, if anyone , is to lose their position . MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: It 's a new question to the Minister responsi ble for the Status of Women. In the Province of Ontario specific fund ing has been provided to the universities through the mini stry responsible for the Status of Women. Will, in fact, her ministry be cons idering such funding in order to maintain a high level of women faculty members at the University of Manitoba? HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Th ank you, Madam Speaker .

I will be working very closely with the Minister of Edu cat ion to asce rt ain the exact natur e of the cuts at the univers ity. As Minister responsi ble for the Status of Wom en, I would be concerned abo ut any cutbacks that have a negative and adverse effect on wom en in any of the faculties at th e univer sity, and I will be working very closely with my colleagues to do whatever is poss ible to ensure that those programs can be maintained so that we advance our goal of ensuring that women enter occupations of a wide varie ty, and that we improve in the direct ion of affirmative action and equality generally.

Sunday -closing laws MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I have a ques tion for the Attorney-General. Could the Attorney-General indicate wheth er it is his intention , or the policy of his department , to continue to prosecute all violations of the Sunday closing laws? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, Madam Speaker, I have taken the position , as the House may recall , that our Sunday laws, that is, all of those except those th at were encompassed in The Lord 's Day Act , are valid .

Those that are in The Retail Selling Act and in The Employmen t Standards Act are valid in my view and, until proven otherwise, we will continue to prosecute within the parameters of thos e statutes. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speake r, a supplementary question . Can the Attorney-General indicate wheth er he is cons ide ring or studying any changes in The Retail and Bu siness Holiday Closi ng Act? HON. R. PENNER: Madam Speaker, that would not fall primarily within my juri sdiction.

There are studies under way looking at employment standa rds generally , and presumably some of those question s may be viewed at that time, but there is no specif ic study under way of the hours of closing; nor is there any intention of initiating a specia l study of that kind . Manitoba Hydro - answers to questions in committee MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mada m Speaker. I direct a question to the Minister of Energy and Mines.

During the committee hearings dealing with the Annual Report of Manitoba Hydro, the Minist er and Hydro officials undertook a number of question s from myself, and other members of the Opposition, as notice. While we have rece ived some responses , there are still 1393

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 a number of outstan ding questions that we asked at that time. I wonder if the Min ister would be good enough to have Manitoba Hydro and/or his office try to furnish the Opposition with those answers. MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Min ister of Energy and Mines. HON. V. SCHROEDER: I thank the member for that question. We are working on it, we would like to get all of tho se questions answered as quickly as possible. I don't have a date yet, but I am planning to meet with Hydro people again later this week and hopefully we can get them all resolved. MR. H.

ENNS: Madam Speak er, I appreciate the Mini ster's response. I would draw his attention to a particular series of questions asked by my colleague, the Member for Morris, and I would ask that that information, as well, be furnished to members of the Opposition. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Madam Speak er, we will try to get that information as well. Strawberries MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. C. BAKER: Thank you, Madam Spea ker. I have a question for the Min ister of Agriculture.

In light of the fact that the strawberry season is upon us, can the Mi nister assure this House and Manitobans that eating strawberries out of hand poses no signi ficant health threat? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Spe aker, I am sure that all Manitobans, including, I am sure, members of this Assemb ly, would want to avail thems elves of the many sites that we have in Manitoba on a U-pick venture. Indeed, I hope that the Leader of the Opposition, as he did last year, avails himself of the U-pick operations.

There should be no danger for Manitobans to pick and eat a little bit and enjoy the succulent produce of Manitoba that Ma ni toba agricultur alists, Ma nitoba farmers, are indeed prepared to produce, some of the finest quality produce anywhere in the world, Madam Speak er. As well, it should be noted that the normal spraying does not occur in the time frame of picking; it occurs far before in terms of the insect control that has to be unde rtaken and after the picking season is over. So it should be safe for all Manitobans to enjoy.

Villa Rosa Home inmate - attempted escape and safety of baby MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mem ber for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: My question is to the Minister of Community Services. A young mother tried to escape from the Villa Rosa Home for Pregn ant Women with her three-month-old baby which she was reported to have grabbed by the scruff of the neck. In light of the fact that she threatened the house mother with a beer bottle, and her lawyer said when she starts drinking she goes beserk, can the Min ister tell the House if the baby is still in the mother's care?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Community Services. HON. M. SMITH: I'll take that question as notice, Madam Spe aker. MRS. G. HAMMOND: To the same Min ister. I wonder, when she is taking it as notice, will she also report to the House what steps have been taken to assure the baby's safety for the future. HON. M. SMITH: Yes, Madam Speaker, although I would like to point out that that particular establishment does not come dir ectly under our department. We would req uire reporting by the staff in ch arge to our department or to the police or to an appropriate medical autho rity.

That would be the normal way that we would get a problem like that referred. Urban Affairs - outstanding debt of Minister MRS. G. HAMMOND: I have a new question, Madam Spe aker, to the Premier. In light of the fact that the Minister of Urban Affairs conveniently forgot that he had an outsta nding debt of $1 ,064.38, including interest, will the Premier ask his Mini ster of Urban Affairs to find out what the colle ctor' s costs are, and instruct his Minis ter to reimbur se the government so that ordina ry taxpayers aren't paying for his loss of memory? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please.

The Hono urabl e Member for Kirkfield Park has another que stion? MRS. G. HAMMOND: I was just wondering, Madam Sp eaker, if the Premier had heard the question and if he would like it repeate d. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister . HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I would like to say a few words in response and point out to the members . of this House how fortunate we are as a government to have one of the capacity of the Member for Concordia who was elected with a large majority in the last election, received a wide endorsation of his constituents, probably even a better percentage than the Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park by way of endorsation; one that is serving in the min istry of Urban Affairs, as Min ister, in a way that I think we can be justifiably proud of, and I am sure has many, many, many more years of service to the Province of Manitoba to serve the people in an outstanding manner . 1394

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 Pay equity - cost to Crown agencies MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourab le Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour.

Now that the government and the Manitoba Government Employees' Association have agreed on a pay equity formula in the Civil Service, which agreement I hope will be tabled soon, and in view of the fact that employees at universities, colleges , major hospitals and Crown corporations start negotiating similar agreements with their employers in October, could the Minister tell us what will be the cost , in these Crown agencies , for pay equity, and who will pay the cost? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. A.

MACKLING: First of all, Madam Speaker, I would like to point out that I believe it will be possible during the course of the Estimates to provide an interim report as to the operations of pay equity . It is not required under the act that there be a report immediately; however, I expect we will be in a position , even though we've only been in operation for a relatively short period of time, to show a major accomplishment has taken place, and the announcement that was made last week confirms that fact.

In respect to cost, one has to look at the cost to women in society for the injustice that they have suffered for hundreds of years in society, and the price that we pay, or the cost all-tolled, when measured in perspective to our total budget, is a very small one, Madam Speaker, and it is expected that, again, the same quantification would apply. It will probably amount to 1 percent of payroll, overall in those agencies. That may or may not be the case, depending on the particular type of agency .

The precise figures have not been determined, as they have not been determined for the Civil Service itself, except that experience elsewhere indicates that 4 percent to 5 percent of payroll would be sufficient. I think in Minnesota the expectation was that it was goin g to be 4 percent to 5 percent, it was something less than 4 percent has been their experience . Certa inly I think the women of Manitoba don't reflect on the dollars concerned in the short term, they're looking at those gains from the long-term position . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West . MR. J.

McCRAE: I'll give the Minister an opportunity to answer the second part of the question , who pays the cost? HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker , instead of the women of Manitoba and the women of Canada suffering the burden alone, now there will be equity and we will all pay fair wages to all people including women. Pay equity - local gov't and school board levels MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker, on a supplementary question.

Have negotiations begun with schoo l board and local governments respecting a time frame for impl eme nting pay equity at those levels in line with the commitment made by the Minister last year at about thi s time; and while he's answering that would he tell us who pays these costs? HON. A. MACKLING: The answer to the first part of the question is, no; however, that will be proceed ing. There is no tight time frame on that, we will be entering into discussions with school boards and municipalities in the very near future.

In respect to cost again, I remind the member that he should, like all other Manitobans, welcome the opportunity for greater justice in society , and we should all share in the benefits and rewards of working in this society, and women should not continue to be singled out to be paid less than men where that isn't a part of the job activity at all. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speake r, I rise to ask a new question of the Minister of Labour which I hope he will not deliberately misunderstand .

Madam Speaker , in view of private sector opposition in Manitoba to imposed pay equity; and in view of negative reports coming from Minnesota respecting pay equity there, which is supposed to be the model for the Manitoba program ; and in view of the fact th at Minnesota legislators would not imagine imposing pay equity on the private sector, does the government still intend to proceed with its election promise to appoint a committee to look into implementing pay equity in the private sector? HON. A.

MACKLING: I don 't have any difficulty, Madam Speaker, in understanding where the Honourable Member for Brandon West comes from. He has earlier referred to pay equity as a buzz word, and I would like to put on the record the fact , Madam Speaker , that the Leader of the Oppos iti on has shown some recognition and shown some formal understanding of the question, because he counted himself very forthrightly in favour of the legi slati on that was passed in the last Session.

When it comes to the question of how the private sector will be involved in the development of pay equity, those policy considerat ions, those programs will be announced in due course . 1395 University of Manitoba - funding to MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Membe r for River Heights . J MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Mini ster of Education.

Last Thursday the Minister of Education stated that our universities received 3.8 percent funding; today he said the Univer sity of Manitoba rece ived 3.0 percent; th e Faculty Association at the University of Manitoba says they received 2.76 percent. Wh at is the correct figure ?

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 MADAM SPEAK ER: The Honourable Mi nister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker , I would have to check Hansard, but I believe I said that the universities received, overall, 3.8 percent funding; and that they received almost 3 percent in operating. University of Manitoba - effect of cutbacks MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Ye s, Madam Speaker , a further question to the Minister of Education.

Has he been informed of concerns about the potential loss of accreditation in the Engineering Faculty as a result of a $300,000 cutback that they will be receiving in next year's operating budget? MADAM SPEAK ER: The Honourabl e Mi nis ter of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speak er, I remind the honourable member of two things: No. 1, that threat has actually been there before, and it is a perceiv ed one at this point; and the second point, and I've made this on numerous occasions, is that this Min ister, this government, did not make those decisions.

Those decisions were made by the Board of Governors and the admini stration at the University of Manitoba. Mr. Naimark is well paid to make those decisions. His administration, I believe, is perfectly familiar with the consequences of making those decisions. The best I can promise to do is to review with the admin istration, at some point, the imp lications, and if there is something that we can do within the capability of the government, then we would certainly do those things. MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

ORDERS OF THE DAY HOUS E BUSINESS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Ye s, Madam Speaker First on a matter of House Business, I would like to ind icate that after di scussions with the Opposition House Leader we have agreed that Manitoba Mineral Resources and Manitoba Oil and Gas will be reviewed by the Standing Committee on Economic Development on July 8, and July 10 if a second day is required. If that second day is not required, the Report of the Manitoba Telephone System will be reviewed by the appropriate standing comm ittee.

Also, on this Frid ay, we will be calling bills first, and then proceeding into Interim Supply, instead of the regular course of the Estima tes. As for today's business, Madam Speak er, I would ask that you call the Third Reading of Bill No. 2, followed by Second Reading of Bill No. 28, and then please follow the Debate on Second Readings, the Adjourned Debate as listed on Pages 2 and 3 of the Order Paper, in the order in which they are listed. 1396 THIRD READING BILL NO. 2 - THE REAL PROP ERT Y ACT (AIR RIGHT S}; LA

LOI SUR LES BIENS REELS (DROITS AERIENS} BILL NO. 2, by leave, was read a third time and passed. SECOND READING BILL NO. 28 - THE NORTHERN AFFAIRS ACT; LA

LOI SUR LES AFFAIRES DU NORD HON. H. HARAPIAK presented, by leave, Bill No. 28,

An Act to amend The Norther n Affairs Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les Affaires du Nord, for Second Reading. MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Northern Affairs. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, the amendment to Bill No. 28 to amend The Northern Affairs Act is coming forward to meet two areas of concern by the communities following the respo nsibilities of Northern Affairs. The first amendment was one related to term of elected offices. As it presently stands, councillors are elected for a two-year term.

The people involved in Northern Affairs communities feel that is not long enough a term to become totally familiar and to become contributing members as elected members for Northern Affairs communities. I would like to tell the House that it now comes into the same length of term as under The Municipal Act. Under The Municipal Act the terms are three years, so with this amendment it comes under the same length of term, for three years as well.

One of the other areas of concern by the mem bers of the commu nities is that they're never able to deal with their own budgets, because if they'r e only in there for a two-year term, they're inheriting a budg et that was set by the previous council and in the following year they are defeated so the newly elected members are dealing with the budget that has been submitted by the previous council. So if there's a three-year term, that gets them a longer period of time to address some of the capital projects that are being brought forward in the communities.

The other area of concern was that the community committees were not part of the election process. Even though the community committees were now having their people elected under The Northern Affairs Act, they were not covered by The Nor thern Affairs Act; they were just being brought along when the other elections were present. So the proposed amendment also brings the local committees under The Elections Act. Real ly, what we're doing is legalizing a practice that has been in existence for a few years because the committees were presently being elected under the same process as the community council.

They'll now be bound by the same act. One th ing I would like to bring forward, Madam Speak er, is the fact that these ch anges were brought

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 forward because of the initiat ive taken by the community councils themselves, the community committees . It is not a change that was brought out because of the initiative of the Min ister of Northern Affairs or members of the staff, t hes e ch an ges we re initiated by the community councils themselves. They saw where there was a need to change the length of the term to three years; and again the communitie s that did not come under community councils, they felt that they should be coming under The Northern Affairs Act.

So with these cha nges , I'm sure that they are going to be well accepted by the communities and I hope that the changes are supported by the Opposition Critic as well . I've given the Opposition Critic a copy of my speaking notes so I'm sure that he will be supporting them . There 's also one othe r minor change; that is the changing from the imperial measurements to metric measurements . Those are the only other changes that were required under the cha nging of The Northern Affairs Act . Thank you, Madam Speaker . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Minnedosa. MR. D.

BLAKE: If the Minister would answer a question for clarification on his remarks. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Yes. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Now that the community councils are now being brought under the same act as municipal officials are governed by, will they be governed by the same conflict of-interest guidelines as they are now applied to the municipal officials? HON. H. HARAPIAK: That has not been taken into consideration but I'm sure that should be extended to apply to the members of the community councils as well. MR. D.

BLAKE: I wonder if the Minister might communica te that to the community councils, so that they're aware of the conf lict- of-interest guidelines and have them report back to him before he proceeds with the bill. HON. H. HARAPIAK: Yes, Madam Speaker, we continuously are in contact with NAGG who have also been helpfu l in making these amendments to the act . So we'll be in touch with NAGG and also with the communities themselves and their representatives and see that they are made familiar with the act and bring that forward before we have the final passing of the act.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourab le Member fo r Roblin-Russell. MR. L. DERKACH: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I move , seconded by the Member for Minnedosa , that debate on this bill be adjourned . MOTION presented and carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Bill No. 3, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for La Verendrye . MR. H. PANKRATZ: Stand. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SECOND READING BILL NO. 4 - THE FAMILY FARM PROTECTION ACT;

LOI SUR LA PROTECTION DES EXPLOITATIONS AGRICOLES FAMILIALES MADAM SPEAKER : Bill No. 4, standing in the name of the Honoura ble Member for Virden . MR. G. FINDLAY: Thank you , Madam Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity to speak to this bill, Bill No. 4, The Family Farm Protection Act, as introduced some days ago by the Minister of Agriculture. I want to spen d some time speaking to this bill, as will other members on this side of the House, because this bi ll will have a lon g-term impact on the agricultural community of this pro vin ce not only for a year or two, but for many years if it is enacted.

We, on this side of the House, certa inly are very much in favour of protecting the family farm and supporting the family farm by an y process possible, by any legislation that can be brought in. The fami ly farm, as I know it and as every rural member on this side knows it, is what built rural Manitoba . Not only did it build rural Manitoba , it built the Manit oba soc iety as a whole. It is the backbone of the Manitoba agricultural economy and is respons ibl e for the economic stability of the total economy of Manitoba . Furthermore, it is respons ible for 20 to 25 percent of the jobs that Manitobans enjoy.

Therefore, we will definitely do everything possible to maintain the rural farm community as healthy and as viable a stat e as possible. To anal yze Bill No. 4, I would like to rev iew some of the economic situations that farmers are facing . Certainly these are hard and difficult times, economicall y, for all farmers.

Some have experienced more severe conditions than others because of different climatic conditions in diff erent parts of the province; some have had personal problems that are more severe than others in term s of handling of finances ; but certainly the hardest hit group of people in our farm community are our young farmers, those who started farming in the late Seventies and early Eighties , the middle-aged farmer who decided to expand during this late-seventy and early -eighty period; and the father and -son situ ation s which are probably the most grie vous situations that we can come acros s, situations wher e the father decided that the son should start farming; the son wan ted to start farming and the father used his collate ral to help the son buy a piece of land.

Then things didn 't materialize as they thought they should. Many of these people entered farming and exp anded during what were dete rmined as high-inflationary periods, high-interest periods , at a time when outlooks and forecasts, by all professionals, by all academics , 1397

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 and all farmers themselves, were nothing but bright and optimistic. They bought land and equipment that they felt, at that time, could be paid for based on projections into the future. But what did happen? There's been a reduction in the inflation rate; declining land values; more moderate but traditionally high interest rates; and declining export value of grain. Th ese once sound in vestments have become nightmarish financial burdens. The farm problem is not, in general, one of bad financial management. it's not one of poor agronomic practices.

The problem, the real problem at the farm level, is a cost-price squeeze for all farmers, whereby the total cost of producing an acre of crop is more than the average gross returns coming in. Any government solution must target this problem head on, cannot come up with a solution that doesn't hit the problem head on. The problem, I would like to repeat, is low gross income relative to the cost of production. The most severe situation, as I have already ind icated, is being faced by our young farmers who, by and large, are well-trained, Madam Speaker .

They are the farmers of the future, they are rural citizens of the future, the citizens upon which our rural communities will be built. These people have been caught up in circumstances that are beyond their control, but over the last two or thr ee years, many have made efforts to remedy their financial pro blems.

Some have worked out debt restructuring plans with their creditors; sometimes they've used a third party mediator to work out these agreements; some have sold off some of their assets to reduce or eliminate their debt; some have reduced their standard of living in order to save the farm; some have taken part-time jobs, sometimes it's the wife that takes the part-time job, or full-time job, to supplement the farm income; still others have not been able to find these remedies to resolve their financial problems.

There have been various analyses done of the farm financial situation and I would like to go over four of them to set the stage for further discussion. FCC, the Farm Credit Corporation, did a study about six months ago and reported some 3,600 Manitoba farms in severe financial difficu lty; another 1, 900 in less severe financial difficult y; around 25 percent of our farms in some kind of financial problem. In discussing this ar ound the farm commu nity , it's di fficult to determine that the number in severe difficulty is really that high.

The credit institutions in this province have also done an analysis and claim 4 percent to 5 percent in severe financial difficu lty. If we look at the statistics of the number of farm bankru ptcies, it works out to around 62 to 69 per year since 1982, an average of about five a month. If you look at the number of commercial farms, some 15 ,000, it represents a half of 1 percent of our farms are going bankrupt each year.

If you look at the numb er of business bankruptcies, running around 300 per year, some people say maybe our farm community is doing a real good job of adjusting to the economic circumstanc es and finding ways to cope by themselves. But the other thing we'll have to keep in mind is that for every farm that declares bankrup tcy, at least five voluntarily leave the system.

They wind it up, they've had enough, they get out with some degree of pride left in them. 1398 As the Mi nister of Agriculture said in his opening remarks, we can't save them all, but we've got to decide who we can save and by what mechanism we can save them. The Min ister of Agriculture produced a White Paper some number of months ago on the farm financial crisis and held a round of farmer meetings in December, January and February of this past winter .

The Min ister claims that through completion of questionnaires at these meetings, and I quote, "By far the vast majority of respondents supported the legislative options, which were: formu lation of farm financial mediation; mor atori um legisla tion; and contra ct adjus tment legisla tion. I, Madam Speaker , attended one of these meetings. The Mini ster spoke - well, he started 20 min utes late in speaking - he spoke for most of the alloted time, there was very little time allowed for discussion.

The Min ister, in his speech, did not analyze the negative potential im pact of legislation that involved contra ct adjustment or moratoriums. The audience was not a full cross-section of the total farm community and many farmers did not fill out the questionnaire because they did not bel ieve in the severe legislative options that the Minister was supporting that day.

In short, the legislative options which were presented by the Min ister at those meetings were presented as a magic wand, that if we have this legislation, everyt hing will be made right; it will correct all the problems and all the debt will go away. Therefore, I say that most farmers filled out that questionnaire without a fair analysis of what the impact of the legislation might be and what effect it might have on the farm community 2, 5, and 10 years down the road.

Now, if we look at the credit needs of all Manitoba farmers, and I've talked to a number of people about this, and where we sort of come to an agreement is that around 45 percent of our farmers in Manitoba either utilize no credit or do not need to use any credit in their farming operation. They're the very fortunate group. They're the group that have been good farmers and have been able to manage their affairs so that they're in that position. Unfortun ately, they tend to be the older group of farmers.

There's around 55 percent then using credit, and about 5 percent, possibly 5 percent of the total farmers are in some deg ree of relatively severe financial difficu lty, and maybe 1 percent or 2 percent are going to fail. That leaves about 50 percent of our farmers utilizing credit, having to util ize credit as part of their operating costs and will be affected by this legislation.

The objective of The Family Farm Protection Act is to, and I quote, "To afford protection to farmers against unwarranted loss of their farming operations during periods of difficult economic circumstances. lt consists of three parts: The Peer Advisory Committee and Panels; secondly , the Judicial Mediation Process; and third ly, the Moratorium on Realization Proceed ings." (Mr . Deputy Speak er, C.

Santos, in the Chair.) After co}lsiderable analysis of the total impact of the act on the com plete farm commun ity, it is our intention to, No. 1, support the Peer Advisory Committee and Panels; No. 2, to support the mediation process if several amendments are made to that proces s; and No. 3, not to support the moratorium powers of this bill.

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 The peer advisory process has been in place in the province since 1982 but it has only handled 22 cases to date, and only about half of those cases are still farming. In 1985, only nine cases came before the Peer Advisory Panels . In most cases, farmers came to this peer advisory group when it was already too late; in other words, there was really nothing to salvage in the farm operation.

Had they come for peer advisory assistance one or two years sooner there may have been something left that could have been constructively saved, either through financial management changes or agronomic practice changes that could have resulted in survival of that farm. It is clear that the peer advisory process needs to be much more widely publicized and promoted so that it can do a better job of serving the needs of those that are facing financial troub le in the not too distant future .

As far as I can analyze, the credit institutions in this province, the credit unions, banks, have worked out agreements with a number of farmers who have reached positions where their credit line is now in questio n as to whether they can carry the debt load any further. They analyze financial viabil ity; they analyze management capability; and they'll analyze the honest y of the client over the years . These reviews have gone on over the last two, three , four years, with ever increasing numbers of clients , and arrangements have been arrived at which allow those producers to stay farming.

They have done such things as set aside interest payments, set aside debt, enter into Small Business Development Bonds , or even take a certain degree of loss and try to restructure the operation. There seems to be, in general discussion , I would say, there's at least 400 of those agreements that have been arrived at in the Province of Manitoba in the last two to three years . The mediation process needs to be structured to assure that every farmer has access to third-party analysis of a situation.

As I said earlier, some farmers have used that mediator process already in their private discussions with their creditors and arrived at reasonable solutions. This mediation process can by very valuable when lines of communication and trust have broken down between the farmer and creditor . It also affords all farmers equa l access to find fair and equitable arrangements and agreements.

In this bill the knowledge and ability to resolv e financial disputes lies definitely with the mediation board - that's the most powerful part of the bill - and the panels it puts in place need to be able to carry out their duties in this respect. A judge or the courts should not be involved in the process because any decisions the judge is going to bring down are going to have to basically follow in line with what the media tion board works out with the creditor and the farmer .

The whole process of the mediation board, the panels and coming up with an agreement , needs to have some more defined period of time, in other words, a sunset clause , so that the process will not go on forever . The mediation board process should be struc tured so that a creditor who wants to commence realiz ation process against a farmer, he must apply to the mediation board, not to the judge nor to the court, but apply directly to the mediation board for leave to carry on such proceedings .

The board should then meet with the farmer and creditor to decide within 15 days whether (1) to grant the leave because the case is so hopeless tha t no amount of further med iatio n will resolve it; or (2) submit the case to a mediation panel for analysis and repo rt. The panel then should report back to the board within 45 days with an analysis of the situation . They should recommend some cour se of action. The board then must meet with the farmer and creditor within a 30- d ay period and work out an agreement or an arrangement which is to be binding on all parties .

The board should be responsible for protecting against the asset values during that period of time, in other words, guard against loss of assets. It should deal with all cases of default on agreements after they are struck; and it should at no time be allowed to extend the review and analysis process for more than an additiona l 30 days . So we are saying that the whole process of mediation and solution should take no more than 15 plus 45 plus 30 days, which is a 60-day period with no more than 30 days allowed for extensions ; so a 90-day period for total resolution of the situation.

As we look at the Peer Advisory Committee and panels and the mediation board and its panels , really they are going to be serving the same need in the farm community and there is probably no need for both sets of committees and panels, that one should do the total job.

As far as the moratorium aspect of the bill, the implementation of such a moratorium is completely unnecessary because the pro vince at this time has legal jurisdiction to do it on ly on land , and it offers no more protection to the farmer than the mediation process because the creditor can still apply to the court for leave and continue the realization proceedings against those farmers considered to be in a hopeless situation .

Overall, as presently written , Bill 4 has numerous shortcomings and long-term negative implications for the farm community , and I have already mentioned , especially the judicial and moratorium aspects of the bill. No. 1, it offers no solution to the cost-price squeeze of the young and financially hard-pressed farmers, and that's the heart of the problem. If you can 't address the problem head on, don 't bother with a solution that's not going to ser ve the need. Wh ethe r a fa rmer is going through the judic ial mediation process or the moratorium , his basic pro blem still exists.

The capital debt is still there in place , the interest is still accumulating on his debt , and $6.5 million is a very insignificant amount to allow those farmers in that problem situation to do an ythin g toward restructuring their debt; their problem is still there . 1399 I would determine that if you are going to realistically affect those farmers that have management capability to get them out of the debt load that they 're in - and let's face it , the marketplace is not go ing to do it for the next two or three years - you are probably going to need to put at least $200 million into farm aid in that direction to have any meaningful impact .

Secondly , the occupation of farming is defin itely a way of life , first and foremost in the eyes of those in

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 the ind ust ry. it's success has been based on pride. The pride of ownership, land and equipment and livestock; the pride of seeing a good crop or a good animal growing and maturing; and generally the pride of accom plishment; that's what farming is all about. The implementation of a moratorium or a judicial process to save a farm in the long term is going to make farmers look like wards of society , and certainly is going to destroy his or her pride in his occupati on. In the long term, moratoriums, once in place, will be politically almost impossible to remove.

I say, without doubt, once they're in there I don't know how any government can remove them because the debt is still there and you are going to drop some guys over the edge of the cliff when you lift it. - (In terjection) - So the debt is still there, how is he going to pay it if he doesn't have some realistic method of getting it out? In the long term, if farmers become a ward of the state, or protected by the state, the pride of motivation will leave the ind ustry and the occupation will be just another job.

Many farmers have a lot of difficulty in their operations because of a lack of education and skills and Bill 4 does nothing to address that shortcoming. No. 4, many farmers have become fed up with the hard work and little or no chance of being able to work themselves out of their financial burdens. Bill 4 offers no help for those that want to gracefully exit the business, retire early, or get some form of retraining so they can enter some other form of occupation. A MEMBER: You haven 't read the bill on it. MR. G. FINDLAY: We've read it over and over. No. 5, under Bill 4, the options of the judge are to grant; (

b) to dismiss an application; or (

c) the judge may "issue such other order as a judge considers appropria te ." This gives the judge the power to order contract adjustment or demand debt write down or demand int erest forgiveness. This option, together with the power of a moratorium, will seriously affect the ability of the farmers to obtain credit in the future from the credit unions and from all other financial institutions. This government, if they cause this to happen, I don't know how they are going to legislate that lenders must borrow money to the farm commun ity.

If we look at Saskatchewan, what they brought in, the experience of their Farm Land Security Act since December of'84, several comments can be made. There has been in that province an increase of the cost of credit to all farmers of anywhere from one� quarter to one-half to 1 percent over what it was in 1984.

If you take that projection into Manitoba and say that all credit will increase by a half percent to all farmers because of this bill to offset the risk element, it will cost Manitoba farmers an additional $6 million for credit costs each year, and if you take that and divide it over all the acres in Manitoba, some 13 million acres, it works out to around 50 cents an acre is the tariff of this bill on all the cultiv ated acres in Manitoba. Furthermore, in Saskatchewan, the bill has caused a reduction in the supply of money available to the farm commun ity.

From 19 84 to 1986 the amount of money available has declined by some 15 percent to 1400 20 percent. So there is somebody out there that hasn't got the credit that they needed to run their farm operations. lt has caused an increase in collateral needed to obtain a loan. For land mor tgages, in 19 84 Saskatchewan farmers were able to obtain 75 percent of the appraised value of the land for mortages, now the lending rate is 60 to 65 and, in some cases lower, of the appraised value is what they can get as a mor tgage. So the amoun t of credit available has certainly decreased.

Furthermore, in Saskatchewan, the credit institutions are now saying well, if there's a moratorium in place we will not go the extra mile with that farm operation anymore, we will start to wind them up a year or two sooner or maybe three years sooner than we would norm ally. The sixth area I would like to comment on is the time allotted to various actions under the judicial mediation and moratorium sections of Bill 4. They are far too long and, together with the recesses that the judge can bring in place, it will allow the process involving any farmer to drag out for many months and maybe even years.

This will certainly not be any help to the farmer. He won't know how to operate his farm during this period of time and I ask, where is he going to get the credit to run his farm while he's trying to hang onto it? There's no question that this bill needs a sun set clause in it. I have dis cussed the need and the impact of this type of moratorium legislation with many farmers since Janu ary, when the di scussion started in the ru ral commun ity. Their comments then and now are still the same, now that the bill is in front of us, and I would like to just go over a few of them with you.

Those that must borrow mone y, and I said before, it's around 55 percent of our farmers, believe without a doubt that it will cost them more money for that credit. Those that are in the bottom 25 percent feel that they will have more difficulty in obtaining credit, period, and some of them that had credit extended to them this spring, with a number of qualifications, believe that come the spring of 19 87, if this bill is in place, will have very severe difficulty in getting their credit.

They also belie ve that some lenders will leave the agricultural field and they certainly fear that the credit unions will withd raw from agricultu ral lend ing. Everybody knows that less competitors in any market will increase the credit cost of money. - (In terject ion) - it's nonsense, that's right.

Everyone out there is facing some degree of financial difficulty and those who have made the financial adjustments at the farm level to reduce their debt by altering their farming methods and taking lower standards of living, feel that if they have been able to make those acc ommodations, why should they be discriminated against?

Another area that people have commented on is that legislation like this will create a lot of hard fe elings between various farmers, between those who have made alterations to their farm operation to reduce debt, those who have worked their debt off over the years, they say why should my neighbour have the opportunity to take advantage of legislation that will bail him out of his debt without having to work his way out of it? Many people, in the 19 30's, as the Minis ter mentions, many of them say we remember back to the debt

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 adjustment legislation of the 1930 's and there's still hard feelings between family members about how some people took advantage of that and others had too much pride to do it. Pride still exists in the farm community. Another comment that comes forward quite often is that the problem of the 4.5 percent to 5 percent are very real.

There is no doubt that they 're real and they should be addressed head on by government, and head on means financial help to the young farmer, to the farmer who expanded at a period of time when it seemed viable and turned out not to be as viable as it needs to be at this point in time . He needs some degree of grant money, maybe , loan guarantees , some sort of ability to set aside his debt. I say the mediation board process can arrive at those solutions if the farmer cannot work it out by himself with the credit institutions.

They go on and say that these problems that exist for a few should not be put on the back of all farmers in rural Manitoba . The full financial burden of the legislation is placed on the backs of those farmers who have good credit standings . It's placed on the back of the credit unions. It's placed on the back of the banks . Many farmers feel that this will either break the credit unions or force the credit unions to withdraw from agricultural lending. It certainly will force some credit unions to request government assistance in the long run.

The government presently is giving the credit unions support to the tune of some $29 million and if the cred it unions are forced to forgive debt to the farm community, or are not able to collect debt because of the write d own provisions that the judge imposes or the moratorium is put in place for a number of years , what will the credit unions do to remain financially viable? They will have to come back to government again for more grants , more forgiveness of debt. Then peopl e have said to me, well, why let the credi t unions fail and then come to the government for help?

Why not use the money up-front right now to hit the problem head on and help those farmers who are in trouble? Nobody believes that Bill 4 will seriously hurt the banks. If they have any financial problems , they'll just pull out of the province and operate in those prov inces where they have less stringent controls put on them . Certainly everybody fears the consequences of having some creditors leave the agricultural field because of the lack of competition. In

summary , we support the peer advisory committe e and panels and the strengthening of their objective to serve the farm communmity . We support th e establishment of the mediation board and panel s, without the involvement of a judge and court , and with well-defined time frames for action .

As I said earl ier, when this is done, the mediation process and the peer advisory committees basically become one and the same and probably the mediation board should be the total focus, and if they believe that a farmer who comes before them doesn't need to have an arrangement arrived at, he just needs some consulting , then they 'll direct him in the direction of the -particular profession al help available in the Department of Agriculture .

Therefore, the mediation board is the focus, the centre of the entire bill , and it can do the job by itself through the kind of people that could be appointed to that board. We oppose the Lieutenant-Government-in-Council having the power to, and I quote , ". . at any time and from time to time , declare a moratorium . . . " 1401 The way this bill is pres ently drafted , for 50 percent of the farmers who use credit to operate their farms every year, at least half of them , in other words, 25 percent of the total farms, will have very severe difficulty in obtaining credit.

Som e of them had trouble this past spring because of the threat of this legisl ation, and certainly a lot more will have a lot more trouble in 1987 and beyond. The government cannot force lende rs to lend to the farm community and this 20 percent or 25 percent are going to have severe difficulty next spring to obtain any kind of credit to put their crop in. If the government says , well, we'll come in and pick up the void, I believe it will cost the government some $300 million to $400 million in new money to offset the hurt of this bill , if it's enac ted the way it is presently writt en.

We recom mend that the government help the young farmer , and those farmers in severe finan cial difficulty because of situations beyond their con tro l, by targe tin g aid directly to them , and do not put in place a piece of legislation that will hurt the farm community for many years to come . The federal Bill C-117 , the Farm Debt Review Act, which received Third Reading last Thursday , comes an awful lot closer to serving the entire real needs of the farm communi ty in this financial area . Bill C-117 covers all property, and this governmen t wants land , equipment, and livesto ck covered.

This bill presently , legally , Bill 4, can cover only land , so why not go with the federal legislation , which can cover all property. Furth ermore, becoming part of the federal bill, having all 10 provinces involved, this can form part of a national agricultural strategy so that all farmers are treated equally righ t across the coun try. Ther efore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I strongly urge that this governme nt withdraw Bill 4 and work with the Federa l Government to implement Bill C-117 for the farmers of Manitoba .

Use the $50 million in reallocat ion money and retra ining to help those farmers who want to go in that direction . Use some provincial money and target it towards those young farmers and those in severe difficulty that warrant special help in terms of grants or loan guarantees , and if the federal Bill C-117 is enacted in other provinces, and Bill 4 is enacted in the Province of Mani toba, we could well see a situation where Manitoba becomes an island where credit institutions star t to pull out and credit becomes more difficult to get here and a lot more expensiv e for our farm community.

This is clearly a situation we do not want to have happen. This bill will clearly hurt mor e farmer s th an it will help and as I've indicated through the cour se of my discussion, we 're trying to help 5 percent ; we'll hurt 25 perce nt. I don 't th ink it's fair arid just and I request the Minister to withdraw this bill and impleme nt Bill C- 117, or work with the Federal Government to implement Bill C-117 in the Province of Manitoba . Thank you , Mr. Deputy Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I move, secon ded by the Member for Lakeside , that debate be adjourened . MOTION presented and carried.

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Deputy Speak er, would you stand the remaining bills, please? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourabl e Min ister of Labour . HON. A. MA CK LING: Ma dam Sp eaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Min ister of Tourism, that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty .

MOTION presented and carried and the Ho use resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to Her Ma jesty with the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Muni cipal Affairs; and the Honourable Member for Kildonan for the Department of Community Services. CONC URRENT COM MITTEES OF SUP PLY SUP PLY - COMMU NIT Y SERV ICES MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: Committee, come to order . We are on Page 34, Resolution No. 32, Item 4.(

b) Child and Family Support - the Member for Pembina . MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, Friday afternoon we curtailed a rather interesting discussion in which we were into the Levels I, 11 and Ill's of child abuse in ves tigation. The Min ister ind icated that the Level 1 files - if I get the terminology correct here - are still maintained in the department as closed files and that basically the individual who may have been accused and subsequent investigation would indic ate there was no basis for the accusations.

That file is still kept by the department and the indi vidual does not have access to it to see what has been said about hi mself or herself. I guess since this is under review, as the Min ister in dicated, could I ask the Mini ster if she thinks that those two restrictions (1) that the file is closed and maintained, and (2) inaccessible to the individual, if she considers that a fair way to proceed in these Level I cases? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Mini ster. HON. M. SMITH: Again, I guess with all issues of this sort, what we are responsible for is trying to balance the rights of one person versus anoth er.

We have involvement with the judicial system as well as with our own Child and Family Services. In this case the files surrounding child abuse are termed "Protection Files" which are sign ificantly different from our ordinary Child and Family Services files. They're available by special means to the court. There is very restricted access and there are different access rights attached to them. Again, my expertise is not in negotiating the degrees of rights in these cases.

That's why we have asked for a review by experts to give us the best advice possible because we would like to give as much access as we possibly can, at the same time, respecting some of the limitations because we're involved with the protection process. I guess the answer is, I think, we're doing as well as we can with our current state of expertise. We 've asked for a thorough review. We will take its recommendations very much to heart, and if we can fine-tune the system and maximi ze access we will, but I suspect we'll end up with a situation where not all the files will be fully open to the accused.

On the other hand, they are protected in terms of who else has access as well. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, one does not have to be an expert in cases of child abuse to have an opinion, and I suggest that the Minister's opinion, the Min ister responsible for this department, her opinion should be very valuable in this review.

We're not talking about being an expert in reviewing individual cases of child abuse because, theor etical ly, by the time you get to a Level I file, "experts" have already investigated the situation, determined there was no wrongdoing but, yet, the Mi nister's own system within the department denies access by the accused and maintains the file in a closed state. One does not have to be an expert in child abuse to ask yourself whether that is within what one would call the broad area of civil lib erties.

I have a great deal of concern with those kinds of files remaining within the purview of the Department of Community Services when there has been no substantiation of the charges and, particula rly, I have concerns about it when the ind ividual so accused does not have access to see what's on the file. Why would you have not have a system in place where those files are destroyed so that there is no record, because you've already indi cated that the Level I, there's no substance to the allegations. We're not talking child abuse here. That's already been determined by the experts.

What we're determining here is whether the Min ister belie ves those files had any necessity and any need to be maintained in a closed fashion. HON. M. SMITH: I think again the question is not quite as confined to our department or as simple as the member suggests. An agency must have some record that they have, in fact, inv estigated a case. Now, we've ind icated we're taking a close look at it from all angles. What files are kept within our department's purview and what ones, in a sense, are part of the justice system because they are protection files and the police have some say as to who can see what files.

I would lean as far as I could in the area of civil rights consistent with our obligation to protect children. Again, when we get the report of the comm ittee, I certainly will take the member's concerns very much to heart and, as I say, I'll lean as far that way as I can, consistent with the protection of children. We're in an evolving area and I don't think any of us feel that the lines we dr aw are firm forever . We're trying to make the best judgment we can in the light of current knowledge. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, I appre ciate that the Mini ster is very cautious on this issue, but I do not think that this is - the Level I files, and we'll maybe get to Level 11 later on - but the Level I files that the 1402

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 Minister, if I understood her answer from last Friday , don't involve the legal system because there is no substantiation of charges . The legal system is not an excuse on which the Minister can hang her hat, on these files . The record of investigation - well, I mean , that's pretty thin gruel, I think, also , to hang your hat on, to maintain this file in a closed position. It is particularly troublesome to me in that you don't allow the individual so accused to see his file, or her file, whatever the case may be.

That just doesn't make sense , to have a system in place that would allow that, because the legality is not involved, because the charges weren 't substantiated. What we have is a situation here where the files are maintained in a closed position; presumably it's some sort of a record of investigation. Well , I'm not sure I could accept that. Certainly the Minister has not indicated any compelling reason why one should even accept that argum ent , that it's there as a record of investiga tion. But give her a little credit and say that, okay, that is a reason to maintain a closed file .

Why, then, wou ld you deny the accused access to the file so they see what's on it? HON. M. SMITH: Again , if we're talking about the Level I, they don't get on the registry; they only remain in the Child and Family Services system. They only remain there for a period of time, after which they 're destroyed. There's a time frame within which they 're kept. Now, the reason for which they're kept is, should there be a recurrence, there is a little more evidence to go on, a little more possibility of pattern.

If the person has been wrongly accused and there's never any reason to reopen the file, no second accusation, there would never, in a sense, I don't think any abuse can be made of it. The so-called accused would be informed of what an accusation was. They might not be informed as to who alleged . I'm not sure of the fine points there . It's because they fall in the category of protection files, and because they're used to enforce the law, the practice has been that if they're open , all the lawyers of clients could see the files and this would give an unfair advantage to a client's lawyer.

Police normally do not allow clients to see files . Now, again, I think all keeping of files, personal files, should be under review. I think we've indicated we'r e doing that. In the past, we've often found that the failure to keep back reco rds has made it difficult. A child's symptom or evidence of abuse , or allegation , is often treated in isolation,

whereas sometimes we need to establish pattern over time in order to substantiate . We feel at this point in our understanding of the abuse phenomenom that it's wiser to follow this procedure. It was debated last year when this particular confidentiality aspect went into the act and agreed to at that time . As I say, it's under ongoing review and we'll certainly take the member's comments into account. MR. D. ORCHARD: What's the time period in which these files on Level I are kept in a closed position before they're destroyed? How long before they're destroyed? HON. M.

SMITH: Yes, the whole question of retirement schedules, I think, is a government-wide concern that 1403 we've been addressing, but there is not a complete process . Most are retired afte r seven year s. We will get the precise information on protection but, to the best of our knowledge at the moment, there's not a retirement

schedule on what are designated protection files, but we'll get more precise information for the member . MR. D. ORCH ARD: Mr. Chairman, I don 't want to nitpick this minister because she's obviously got advice. The answer she gave me a little while about files being retired was obviously given to her by staff. But either you destroy the files , as you said five minutes ago , or you don't. I would appreciate having that information at some point in time before the committee fin ishes with this subject. Secondly, Mr. Chairman , the Minister indicates that the files are kept there in case of future investig at ion.

Now, I'm not an expert at law , but it would seem to me that there is tantamount in that statement a presumption of guilt. You know, once again, I'm not certain of the law , but I think that if there was a c ircumstance where an individual was accused and charges were pending but the charges wer e dropped, or he was found not guilty of those charges in a court of law and a few years late r a similar offence was again brought to bear on this individual, that in a court of law the admissib ility of the first charge would be disallowed in a court of law because he was proven innocent of that.

Yet you have a system here where you 're maintaining reco rds because you may need them for future investigation, which to me is a presumption of guilt that not even the highest courts of this land have .

I appreciate that this sytem is new and I appreciate that the Minister wants to protect the children, and that's a goal that all of us have , but you cannot, I believe, have a system in place where you deny access to the accused of the file that's written up by presumably experts within your department who investigate it, keep that file for an indeterminate number of years in a closed position just in case there 's another accusation made and you might need to rejuvenate the file . That's pre sum pt ion of guilt , Madam Minister.

I don't think that the rights of Canadians and Manitobans are at all protected under this kind of a circumstance.

I'm talking of a very serious circumstance because I'd been into one of these circumstances where the individual that was accused, a young girl , when she found out what she was accused of and the parents tried to find out what the investigation said and there was no further charges - I don't know wheth er it was a Level I or a Level II case because I couldn 't even find that out for the family - but the child has that file maintained and she contemplated suicide because that blemish was hanging over her head.

Now surely, Madam Minister , you can't say that this system for the prot ecti on of children is going to allow that presumption of guilt to hang over one 's head for the rest of their lives or for seven years or whatever the case may be in a Level I investigation. Your system is not correct. I suggest, Madam Minister, that what the department needs .. . MR. CHAIRMAN: I'd suggest to the member that he please direct his remarks through the Chair .

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 MR. D. ORCHARD: Through you, Mr. Chairman, to you, Madam Min ister. I would hope that you would take some min isterial responsibility in this and not simply fend it off that experts are taking a look at this and use some common sense and tell them that this system needs to be reviewed, because you can't keep on maintaining a pr esu mption of guilt to accused Manitobans.

This legislation - and I'm probably going to make the Mi ni ster very angr y here - but this kind of legislation could be used in personal grudges between individuals because the way the legislation is struck the moment an accusation is made, it must be followed through. There can be no substance whatsoever; it can be a bizarre sort of a grudge by someone who knows your law; and they can report someone in this committee room of suspected child abuse. 1t must investigated and that person will have a file, closed, but there for future reference on a presumption of guilt.

Now surely the Mi nister can't say that that is legitimate in the operation of this registry in this syste m. Particularly the Min ister can't say that is justifiable when the accused individual cannot even have access to his Level I file to see what the charges were, who investigated, and who made the accusations if they are totally false. That is the system that is in place right now and I could, Mr . Chairman, report you.

You would be investigated and you would be on file with absolutely no substance just because I happen to disagree with a ruling you made in committee where I addressed my remarks to the Chair only, and not to the Minis ter dire ctly. That's what's in place. I don't think that it's a good system.

I think that it's the kind of a system where the Mini ster - who over the past number of months appears to have been getting some questionable advice from some of her senior staff people - needs to take some initia tive and show some leadership and tell that committee what she thinks is proper in terms of maintenance of closed files in Level I reported cases of child abuse. This is an ins tance where some leadership from the Minis ter is needed. To date, I haven't heard the Min ister say anything except it's developing and that we want to protect the children.

Well, all of us want to do that but there are certain constraints in this free society of ours where you can't impinge upon a pers on's civil liberties in doing that. I think your system currently impin ges upon those civil lib erties of individuals who are accused wrongly and have neither access to their file - and the file continues to exist for an indeterminate period of time under , as I say, a presumption of guilt in case further investigation is needed. So will the Mi nister show some leadership and give that committee some dir ection on the Level I? HON. M.

SMITH: The area of child protection is admittedly a very difficult area. it's also an area where, in the past, children were not protected; we had no systems in place. What we're building is a system that gives adequate protection to children. We do bump into the civil li berties issue of individuals alleged to be at fault and I have said that all along. I have said what we are looking at is the best fine-tuning and that's what we will continue to look at. We know that there is a possibility of frivolous accusat ion.

We also know there's the possibility of unsu bstantiated accusations where it's helpful to know at a later date that that earlier situation existed. The difficulty is in anyone being able to differentiate which is which. The process of justice and protection doesn't given 100 percent knowledge or insight to anyone. That's why we've asked it to be looked at from every angle. Anyone who's written any report for me in the past kno ws that I don't take recommendations without question or without variation on many occasions.

I think it would be foolhardy of me to leap into the fray and say "do it this way; my way or no way" prior to having had that analysis. I'm not prepared to do that. I think we've got in process the best we can do at the moment with a review, and we'll certainly be fine-tuning the system as much as we possibly can. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, then the Mi nis ter is satisfied with the current situation where files, which were unsu bstantiated, not frivolous, but unsub stantiated, are maintained for future reference, she's satisfied with giving to these experts in the field, under this legislation, powers at law which we don't even have in our legal system, an example I used earlier of a person accused and found not gui lty, no lawyer can admit that as evidence for proof of future charges. The Mini ster is satisfied that her system confers that kind of power that not even the court have. HON. M. SMITH: Mr.

Chairman, all I can say is that as knowledge in the area of child abuse has developed, the only way that we have been able to make headway are by the people, whether they be medical or in Child and Family, or on the police side, keeping records of their experience, analyzing it so as to arrive at a better way of handling situations. Any social service worker will keep records of the cases they've handled. There are saf eguards as to who has access to those records, but good practice means that you are trying to look at things that develop over time.

If there is no fault or risky situation, the probability of that coming to the surface again is very, very slight. If there should be a num ber of false allegations, I think anyone in the social work field would look at the pattern of people making the allegations. But to say that we shouldn't have records for a period of time, I think, is jumping to conclusions.

Perhaps down the road, when we're more adept at handling these cases, perhaps if there are clear patterns that emerge over and over again, and not a lot of variations, wiser people than us will be able to arriv e at an even better balance between the civil liberties issue and the child protection. I think that we are doing a conscientious job at the moment to find the best balance and I certainly intend to continue doing that. MR. D. ORCH ARD: Mr. Chairman, would the Minister consider it lair for the accused to have access to a Level I file? HON. M.

SMITH: You know, I've said I'm going to review the issues in a coherent way, in a rational way. There will be a report on the Abuse Regist ry. I'll take into 1404

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 account the points the member has made. I don't think there are simple yes/no answers to the questions he's posing. I think that for the moment we can agree to differ on the issue, but I appreciate his concern and I think that it's a real concern that deserves attention. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, I have a question to the Min ister and it's dealing with the teacher that was charged in Ste.

Rose. lt's not actually dealing with the case. lt's the group that's mentioned in the paper, called SCAN, the child protection group. Does this type of a group have any official status? Are they funded in any way, or is it just a group that is formed in the communi ty, or does the Mi nister even know? HON. M. SMITH: The group called SCAN is the name of our multi-disciplinary teams, made up of doctors, police, and social workers. They exist by virtue of the guideli nes that the four departments endorsed.

Each has a separate role. lt is the Attorney-General's" Department that will take a case to court, and then it becomes a matter for the judicial system as to the disposition. . · The group is not spe�if jca liy funded, other than doctors may be on salar1 '"6r on a fee base. Police and social workers, of course, are under salary to their respective emplo yers, but part of their work is to work in this multi-disciplinary team. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Has the Min ister read the report that was in the Free Press about this particular issue? HON. M. SMITH: No, I don't have it to hand.

My staff have given me a rough outline of the case where there were many counts and it was taken to court and apparently the charges were dismissed by the judge. lt now is a matter for the Attorney-General to review and determine whether any further action should be taken. MRS. G. HAMMOND: I'm not quite as concerned about the actual case and how it ended. What I am concerned about is what was reported in the press. One instance here, this group was ch astised by the Attorne y General's office for their inter ference.

I'd like a comment on that, and also, is it possible that - and I understand these groups are probably doing the best they can - but is it possible that they are putting more pressure, as is inEli cated in this article, on the prosecuting authorities without the evidence at hand? Has the department looked into this particular case? HON. M. SMITH: We're not aware of any chastisement by the Attorney -General's Department. As to whether they put more pressure, I presume, because of their different roles in child protect ion, that each group brings a different perspective and a different type of expertise.

Now, the medical people, obvi ously, see a certain type of evidence. The police elicit anoth er, and the social workers would have yet another perspective on it. Going to court is never a 100 percent secure situation. I presume that people take the action that they deem is appropriate and where they assess the probabilit ies, but it's in that range. There's not certainty of evidence. You also have to deal with different court

interpretations, different judges and their view of the situation. MRS. G. HAMMOND: This is the last question. I wonder if the Mini ster's staff would just take a look at this particular incident and see if there has been anything that may be, should be corrected in the procedure that was handled in this one so that it maybe doesn't happen again, or maybe they were just quite right with the way they proceeded, I don't know, but I would like to find out. HON. M. SMITH: Ye s, by all means. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CAR ST AIRS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In reviewing the annual reports of the agencies, particularly the ones in the Winnipeg area because I l:i�1ten't got the ones in from the other areas as yet, I am amazed at the lack of service data which is available. Is that information available? I mean, do we know - I assume somebody kn ows - exactly how many children are going through each of these agencies and for what reason they're going through the agency? HON. M.

SMITH: The reason we've started on a quite extensive program of comput erization at the provincial level is so we can have a quick and standardized and complete read ing on our stats partly for monitoring and partly for future planning. lt's all depended on manual systems in the past, so the moving into a new era is taking some time. One thing, of course, that's occurring with the new Winnipeg agencies is that they're taking a much wider variety of cases because they're in the preventive support area as well as in the mandated service area. MRS. S. CAR ST AIRS: Mr.

Chairman, I'm not going to suggest that the Min ister give us all that data. What I am going to suggest, however, is that perhaps she could look into asking the agencies when they're preparing their annual reports to, in fact, include a greater statistical analysis than we get at the present time. HON. M. SMITH: That's a good point. We look for improvement in that area all over because it's a vital tool for monitoring and planning with commun ity-based agencies. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: The other thing that I must admit hit me rather radically while going through them this weekend was that there didn't seem to be any uniformity in budgeting procedu res. They all had di fferent categorizations and one assumes they're running generally the same kind of operations. First of all, one would think that was very expen sive in that they're not using a simplified, uni fied system, but it also makes it very difficult to evaluate each agency and the strength and weaknesses of that agen cy. 1405

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 HON. M. SMITH: In fact, they are required to follow a stand ard budget process, certain ly, in their rela tionship with us. Now, whether they choose to display it somewhat differently in their annual reports, as I say, with communi ty-based service deliver y, we're trying to encourage some diversity and relevance to the local community and I agree that budget display shouldn't be one of the areas where we expect wide diversity , but certainly , in our relationship with them we have a standard format.

We also did put in a consultant to fine-tune our case identi fication, our classificat ion of cases and management review to see that, I guess, standard num bers were being used and that management techniques that might show up well in some areas, not so well in others, that comparison could be used to assist agencies that were having a more di fficult time. Again, the agency workloads are quite different from area to area and you do find the ones that have a large number of acute cases have to focus there.

Other areas that have fewer of those but are more into the preventive workload, will tend to develop a different pattern of service. So, there is diversity based on their need, but there's also a sense of priority that I think is there as well. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Memb er for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Last year, when we were on the Estima tes, group home location was a big item of concern and this forced the City Council to take action ruling that homes must be a certain distance from each other in order to prevent over-concentration of group homes in any one area within the city.

This was pertaining especially to the area of Wolseley. Can the Min ister tell me how many new group homes came up within the last year, if any, and whether there still is the problem of location of group homes? HON. M. SMITH: To our knowledge, there was only one new one opened last year and it was not in an area of previous concentration. Our goal is to try to have the group home service in the same region as the youngster lives in, to have minimal intervention in their life, and to promote as close ties as possible to their own commun ity. MR. A.

BROWN: Would that then be the reason why we have such a concentration of these in the Wolseley area, these group homes? HON. M. SMITH: The member asked me about the previous year's experience. The desire to zone and avoid concentration is because of many years during which the homes opened where indi vidual sponsors could find suitable sized homes at minimal cost. The fact that it happened to be not inner city and not suburban areas, is not surprising because that's where the larger relatively inexpensive homes were.

However, we don't think that is a desirable pattern for the future. lt loads up the schools, community centres, everyw here if they concentrate too heavily in one area. So we're in a sense trying to remedy a situation that's developed over time. 1406 MR. A. BROWN: I asked the Mini ster one other question and I have not received an · answer to this. I believe that she did say that she was going to try to get back to me and this was the fact that I was told that to process a Native child, that the cost was 300 percent higher than to process a non-Na tive child.

When we take a look at the Child and Family Services, at the grants and the incr ease in grants, certainly then, we must question why we do have this huge increase. I wonder if the Min ister can tell me now why these huge inc reases, whether they are justified, and what is the comparison between a non-Na tive child being processed through the system and a Native child. MR. CHAIRMAN: I believe if the member remembers correctly and checks Hansard, the Min ister did respond to that question earlier when he asked it, and if you would check Hans ard , ther e is a response.

My recollection was there is no attributable significant cost difference whatsoever in processing any type of child, but I would suggest that's in Hansard, so you could check that - if the Mini ster wants to answer that. HON. M. SMITH: In one sentence, there are more services being given to Native families and child ren than were before. There were almost no preventive support services given under the old system. More of them are being given by Native staff - not manda ted agencies but family agencies like Ma Mawi.

There is no breakdown of cost per child such as the member alleged; I don't know where he has acquir ed that information. MR. A. BROWN: Well, someone obviously must have done some work on this and taken it per child care among the Native centres as opposed to the non-Na tive in order to come up with that type of figure. I would appreciate if the Minister would watch that area to a certain extent because when you see the type of increases, quite frankly, that have been occurring within the last couple of years, then a person must become somewhat concerned. HON. M.

SMI TH: If the need is there, that's where it's given. We came from a time when service to Native children and families was on a life-and-death basis; it wasn 't as well developed as for the rest of th e commun ity. We're trying to bring it up to where it's on a par so that those children and families get a fighting chance to make their way. There are associated problems, of cour se, of unemployment, housing, job skills and so on which require other departments and other groups in society to take action.

But I think the dir ection we're going is to try to give equitable service where there is need to all children and families. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(b )1-p ass; 4.(b)2- pass; 4.(b)3- pass; 4.(b)4- pass. 4.(

c) Seven Oaks Youth Centre - the Member from Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: I would like the Min ister to give me some kind of

summary as to exactly what the purposes of Seven Oaks Youth Centre are. In my mind I'm not

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 quite sure that I unde rstand real ly, what purpose Seven Oaks is supposed to serve. If she could give us some sort of opening statement, I would appreciate that. HON. M.

SMITH: This is a centre that provides short term care and shelter for youth who require a secure setting as distinct from a more open placement. lt's a reception and shelter facility for children in care who require a secure environment for their own protect ion. lt accommodates up to 45 children for short-term care and assessment. lt's received a one-staff year inc rease to allow for vacation relief for facility staff. lt has held up to 60; it's averaged 45 over the year. MR. A. BROWN: How many staff positions do we have over there at the present time? HON. M. SMITH: Forty -eight. MR. A.

BROWN: Could I have a breakdown on these 48 as to how many of these would be admi nistrative staff and how many would be field staff, so to speak? HON. M. SMITH: One superintendent, 1 deputy, 1 coordina tor, 6 in charge - the supervisor of this shift, 21 counsellors, 1 nurse, 8 support people and 9 replacement personnel. MR. A. BROWN: What is the present occupancy of the Seven Oaks Youth Centre? HON. M. SMITH: I mentioned that it's averaged 45 but it's gone up as high as 60 and at this current season it's running between 55 and 60. MR. A.

BROWN: Did you decrease the beds at all in this item from two years ago, let's say? HON. M. SMITH: No. MR. A. BROWN: That's all the questions I have on that item. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Ye s, Mr . Chairman, there are a number of children who the option is that they are not put in the Youth Centre and in fact they are not put anywhere. They are put into their own care, if you will, for a period of time.

On what is that kind of decision made, whether they go to Seven Oaks or whether they are in fact considered capable of functioning because they are, to use one of your own phrases, street wise? HON. M. SMITH: Ye s, first I would like to differentiate between the Xouth Centre and Seven Oaks. The Youth Centre operates under the correctional system and that is where a youngster has been accused of breaking the law, and that operates under The Young Offenders Act. Seven Oaks Centre is under the Child and Family Service side, and that is where a youngster is deemed in need of protection.

The decision as to whether they are put there or on their own recogn izance or with a friend or whatever is based on both the police and agency's referral.

The factors they take into accou nt, again, the police because they may be inv olved in the protection of a youngs ter, a case where there is not a breaking of a law but where there is some other concern, the factors that would be considered would be the age; whether there is an alternativ e place to stay; whether the youngster is acting out and ther efore a danger to themselves or possibly suicidal, so a danger to others or to themselves; the degree of disturbance which, of course, would be related; the parental attitutde at the time of the decision; and the past behavioural pattern of that particular youngst er.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The time for Pri vate Members' Hour has arrived, it is 4:30 p.m. Committee rise. SUPPL Y - MUN ICIPAL AFFAIRS MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Commit tee, please come to order. This

section of the Commit tee of Supply has been dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Muni cipal Affairs. We are now on Item No . 4.(a), Muni cipal Assessments, Salari es; 4.(b), Othe r Expenditur es. The Member for Arthur . MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr . Chairman, I would have thought the Min ister would have had a fairly extensive statement to make at the beginning of this section.

He has gone throughout the province this last week-and-a-half, two weeks, leaving everybody with the opinion that the assessment review and change is well under way, makes reference to the Weir Committee which was carried out and brought down in about 19 81 or'82. We were expecting certain annou ncements to come from the Min ister dealing with the whole question of asse ssment. As well, Mr. Chairman, when we look at the Estimates, there appears as if there is going to be less activity than last year when it comes to the amount of money that is put in place to carry out any assessment changes.

He has reduced the amount of dol lars in Othe r Expenditures from $612 ,700 to $553,400 this year. So one cannot expect a lot of action, I would think, from the Min ister. There are numerous cases and concerns being brought forward to the different members of our side dealing with the inequities in the assess ment.

And I guess probably the first one that I would like to deal with is the hearings that took place dealing with some of the Almasippi sands in the Lansdowne Muni cipali ty wher e ther e was a mi stake in the classifica tion of land, and the decision to maintain or to uphold the current assessment is one which I would ask of the Min ister to investigate and review personal ly.

When one looks at the going cash rent in some of the Almasippi sands in the Gladstone area of $15 an acre, from a range of $8 an acre to probably the high of $15 an acre, ranging with a lot of them in the $13 to $7 an acre; and th en when one turns to the assessment review page where they've incr eased the assessed value of the property some 72 percent to 75 percent, I think is a little bit unreasonable. I would ask if the Min ister would personally take a look at this. Here we are - this is the soil type and 1407

Wednesday, 2 July, 1986 texture. Almasippi, very fine sand, it was an old base index. The rate per acre was $40.20, and it's now gone up to $69.30, or an increase of 72 percent. We have seen a high of a 17 2 percent incr ease on some Almasippi loam, very fine sand, which went from $16 an acre to $44 an acre, which was 172. Here is even a greater one of 242 percent increase in an assessm ent; 242 percent, is the top and a low of 71 percent increase. I would think that the Min ister would want to personally take a look at the concerns brought forward to the Appeal Board . . . MR. D.

BLAKE: The chairman of the board doesn't know what a hectare is. MR. J. DOWNEY: Wel l, that's the other point I want to raise. When one looks at the presiding acting chairman of the mee ting, one would question - no, not questioning the person himself, but probably the background to have a clear und erstanding of the type of soil on which he is dealing with. My colleague from Minn edosa just ind icated he didn't know what a hectare of land was. One would certainly expect that if he didn't know what a hectare of land was, he wouldn't have any idea what the classification of the different soils were.

There are many, many areas of concern. My colleage from La Ve rend rye the other day made brief mention of it, some major inequities that are in place. I think the gr eatest fear of the farm communi ty, and that is that when they are talking about tax assessment and tax change, that they are going to end up with a continuation of high taxation and highly assessed farm lands and an addition of taxes on all outbuildings and farm buildings. Well, that is not my position to stand here and support that kind of move.

I would like to put on the record some of the discussions, and I think some of the things that would be workable, and maybe the Min ister would comment, and I would ask for his comments, as to what action and what he perceives to have taken place. There are some concerns that if, in fact, there was an im position of taxes and all farm buildings were assessed, that it would in fact discourage upgrading and development of the rural communi ty, and I agree with that assessment.

Particularly where people would build a machine shed or some investment that would create em ployment and add value to that property, then in fact that, if it were dir ectly related to the cost of taxation and the assessment on that farm prope rty, then there would be a reluctance to do it. I will tell you why, Mr. Chairman, because the farm community have been treated unfairly in the imposition of school taxes and taxes on their farm pr operties. That's why I think that it goes right back to the basis, Mr. Chairman, of fairness and equitabili ty; that's the question.

If you start assessing farm buildings and imposing taxes on farm buildings without removing some of the other taxes off the farm land, then it won't wash. You can't burden the farm commun ity with any more. What better time would it have been to have the debate on Bill 4? We now have the government introducing Bill 4 to bring in debt moratorium legislation because of a very tough time in farm incomes and high costs. What 1408 a very opportune time to talk about the assessment on farm land and the taxation on farm land.

Is this Mi nister going to stand in his place and support the Mini ster of Agriculture on his bill to introduce debt moratorium when in fact there are dir ect ways he could take action as a Cabinet Minis ter in relieving some of the burden of taxes and some of the assessments on some of these farm lands? But I guess the main thing, Mr. Chairman, is I would like the Mi nister to stand and say where he's at with the upgrading of the whole tax assessment question flowing from the Weir Report, flowing through the former Min ister of Municipal Affairs who was there for almost four years - well, the Member for Ste.

Rose had the portfolio for two or three . A MEMBER: Two. MR. J. DOWNEY: For two. Then there was the Member for Springfield who was going around the province in a great storm and is now hired by the taxpayers at some $55,0 00-a-year plus all the expenses. Where are we at in the total question of assessment? Is the Min ister sympathetic to the concerns of the farm communi ty when it deals with assessing and taxation of farm buildings? Will we see, under this Min ister of Municipal Affairs' term of office, a taxation on all farm buildings in the province? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Min ister. HON. J.

BUCKLASCHUK: On the matter of the Municipal Board decision on the land in the Rural Municipal ity of Langford, I'v e discussed this at some length with the Member for Ste. Rose, and I have given him a commitment that I'd sit down with him and with staff and we would go through this decision in its entirety and take a look at the concerns that have been expressed. I'l l

schedule that as soon as I possibly can. On the matter of assessment reform - the Member for Arthur was at Kenton - that is basically the same speech that I gave at the six meetings that I did attend indicating that we are moving along in an orderly manner as expeditiously as possible, analyzing or evaluating information that is being provided to us that will enable us to make the kind of decisions that will provide for more equitable means of taxation.

No decisions have been made at thi5 point because we've only recently received the information that we required from the city, although I believe we've had the provincial information for some time. In sofar as the question about the taxation of farm residenc es or farm buildings, ther e's been no announcement made, no decision has been made. Again, until we have full information on a province wide basis, at which time we will take a look at the situation. I can give one commitment, that certainly

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-1-37
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 1st hansardpdf 37.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	779400635909f545e7dccff90b9ab59fe2852694

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