Manitoba Hansard — 8 April 1985 (Sitting 21B, 32nd Legislature, 4th Session)

32-4-21b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 8 April, 1985. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMIT TEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - HIGHWA YS AND TR ANSPOR TATION MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: The committee will please come to order. We were considering Item No. 2(

a) Operations and Maintenance, Maintenance Program. The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Mr. Chairman, before we adjourned we were discussing, among other things, the naming of a bridge -the Member for Roblin-Russell was. The Department of Mines and Natural Resources have an ongoing policy for naming various lakes, rivers, whatnot, after deceased servicemen of the last war, or the Korean War. There is a committee that is in charge of that, and it seems like a rather good policy that seems to work fairly well.

I wonder if the Minister might consider this policy in the naming of bridges or various other structures in his department that may require names from time to time. lt might assist and speed up the process. Apparently there seems to be some problem in arriving at decisions in various names for bridges. I wonder if you might care to comment on that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minist er. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Well, there's no problem with arriving at decisions that fit into the longstanding policy with regard to the naming of bridges, and major structures across major waterways, such as, the Assiniboine and Red Rivers, the Saskatchewan River -is there a bridge named, yes. So. it's been in place, and perhaps the Churchill River is another one. The Nelson River would be a major waterway that would warrant the naming of bridges because of the major size of those structures.

But, as the member knows, there are hundreds and hundreds of smaller bridges on PTHs and PRs that have never been named, and I don't know that it would be that productive to go back and start naming all of these bridges with waterways, with rivers, and lakes and so on. I could see the difference there insofar as Natural Resources are concerned because they deal with mapping and all the rivers and lakes perhaps should be named.

If we were going to get into a major expansion in the naming of bridges that might be one way to do it, the way the honourable member stated; although, in many cases, there might be requests from local communities to use a different criteria, for whatever reason. In the case that the Member for Roblin-Russell was talking about, I think it was a local settler or individual that had lived there in that neighbourhood and so, that was one of the reasons why it was being requested. So, if we were going to have an expanded policy for naming, I think, we'd have to consider perhaps other criteria as well.

But that isn't a priority, I don't see, at this particular time, perhaps getting into a large expansion in that particular area. I'm not considering it at this time. MR. D. BLAKE: lt was just brought to my attention over the supper hour, Mr. Chairman, that PR 259 that crosses the Assiniboine River, for the centennial celebrations in that area, there is a Sproat family there, and apparently there was a bridge named the Sproat Bridge there with the unveiling of a ceremony on that particular occasion, and a plaque on the bridge renaming it after the Sproat family. I believe the former Minister took

part in those ceremonies. lt was a situation similar to the one that the Member for Roblin-Russell is referring to. lt's their centennial celebrations, and it has some historical significance on that site, so the Minister might consider that maybe as a -what's the word I'm looking for -precedent has been established on the naming of that bridge on more than one occasion. 650 Just while I have the floor, Mr. Chairman, we've been talking about maintenance, and I know this is a difficult job because so many unusual circumstances come up. I know the one that I cite is not the only one.

In my area, on 262 south of the Town of Minnedosa, Is a surface road, but it's badly in need of repair. There are fairly extensive repairs needed each year on it, although you can drive down there with a car at 70 miles per hour -pardon me, 90 kilometres, because it's a 90-kilometre road -quite handily. But the farmers using it extensively with the grain trucks, it's almost impossible to run a grain truck down there at any speed. lt's just continually like this, so they are using the other roads that are reasonably good gravel roads In the area.

Of course, with the heavier loads, they're just pounding the devil out of those other roads, and maintenance becomes a problem on those as well as the hard surface roads. So there are unusual circumstances that require additional maintenance from time to time that the Minister may be getting some requests for. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I see that we're under the area of Operations and Maintenance. Under that particular heading there comes bridge design and support services in tendering; what is the policy of the Department of Highways in relationship to tendering?

Are all projects tendered as far as the design work is concerned? Is that what this means, or what is he referring to in this kind of a statement? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The same process is in place with regard to tendering of major projects, this has been for the last number of years, at least. Over $75,000 projects are tendered; $10,000 to $75,000 projects would have a simplified tendering system, maybe invitational tenders for them, locally tendered; and anything over $250,000, of course, has to receive

Monday, 8 April, 198� Treasury Board approval; anything between $25,000 and $250,000 is precleared by the Minister. So this is the tendering that we're talking about. it's not related to the design, if that was what the member's question related to. There are two separate segments or portions of this

section of the Budget when dealing with design work, another dealing with tendering, and so on, and the member will see as we go through the appropriations that those areas are covered specifically. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the Minister indicates that all work between $25,000 and $250,000 is left up to the decision of the Minister. Has all work in that range been tendered by this Minister? HON. J. PLOHMAN: All the work between $25,000 and $250,000 has to be precleared, by the Minister, it has to be signed by the Minister, and of course, these are tendered projects, I believe, in all cases. MR. J.

DOWNEY: So I understand correctly that all . work done by the Department of Highways in the range of $25,000 and $250,000 are all subject to a tender process? HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's to my knowledge and, with the exception of winter road contracts which are negotiated, in some instances, for the benefit of the local communities that are affected. MR. J. DOWNEY: So Winter Roads are not subject to the lowest tender, but they are negotiated with the department? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, they're negotiated between the department and communities involved in most cases where they supply the equipment and manpower. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Is the Minister satisfied that using public monies that, in all cases, the province or the taxpayers are getting the best deal without a tendering process on these? tlON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, I would think that we're getting a reasonable price. Certainly, there has been no increase In the Winter Road contracts for the past three years. They have been negotiated at a zero percent increase for the last three years for all of the contracts in the Winter Roads, and that, of course, is cost shared with the Federal Government -those dollars, almost all of those.

There are a couple, I believe, that are not cost-shared, but the remainder are, and of course that's in the next

section if the mem ber wants to discuss those in detail under Winter Roads which is the next

section of the budget. But I do believe that we are getting a good price and, of course, we may be paying slightly more for the benefit of having those communi ties involved for creating employment in the communities that otherwise would not be the case, so there is a positive, and the training that they get, expertise that they develop in business and operating their business, so I think it's a positive aspect for the commu nities. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the Minister makes reference to the fact th at ther e hasn't been any 651 increases.

Would there have been, in fact, some decreases because as I understand it, there is a surplus of people invol ved in the construction of highways and these kinds of works? Does he not feel there might even have been a reduction if it had been put out in the tendering process? HON. J. PLOHMAN: You know the total -again we are only talking about Winter Roads here and that is the next

section of the budget. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, he is talking about winter roads; I am talking about operations and maintenanc e, and it says "support services in tendering." I think that covers more than winter roads. I think this is a general process within the Department of Highways and if I'm not correct, then have the Minister correct me. I am not talking specifically about winter roads; I am talking about general practices of allocating work for the Department of Highways, and it says "support services in tendering." Maybe he could define what that means then if I am incorrect in my assumption of what it means. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, I believe we are on 2.(

a) Maintenance Program. Is that what the honourable member is assuming? If he's gone on to the next subappropriations of . . . MR. J. DOWNEY: No, Mr. Chairman, I'll read it out for the Minister in case he doesn't understand it. The title is "2. Operations and Maintenace. Provides program man agement and special ized fun ctio nal support services in tendering, bridge design and engineering to the Department's maintenance, assistance and construction programs. Provides for the maintenance of Manitoba's primary and secondary road system, and winter roads. (

a) Maintenance Program." Is he tendering the Maintenance Program, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur read the description of all of No. 2 from (

a) to (g). MR. J. DOWNEY: Well, I asked the Minister: is he tendering the Maintenance Program? HON. J. PLOHMAN: So the member is asking regarding 2.(a), whether we are tendering in the Maintenance Program, and the an!>wer is tha t the same system that has been in place wit h regard to tendering of maintenance work is now in place in the department. I went over this to some extent before the break that certain works are tendered, others are put out on an hourly basis, on a rotational basis, for equipment rental that's needed on the maintenance work that's done.

So it varies, depen ding on th e availability of departmental equipment and the nature of the work that's being done. The Maintenance Program has been expanded in each of the last number of years for the Member for Emers on, so there has not been any decrease whatsoever. There has been an expansion for inflation in the Maint-,Jnnnce Program, so there is as much going on and the same standards are being mamtained as

Monct.y, 8 April, 1985 they always have been maintained in the maintenance area of this Budget. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, if the Min ister feels unco mfortable about dealing with the questioning here we'll wait until we get on to the next page, then maybe some of my colleagues have further questions in this re gard. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's a better idea. The Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask a few questions that follow along the lines of those asked by the Member for Arthur with respect to tendering within the Mai ntenance Program.

What discretion is left the district areas and, indeed, even the supervisors within some of the yards to tender out certain jobs in the area of maint enance? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I believe the honourable member is asking about the equipment rental work that is done, and that is hired on an hourly basis for maintenance work. A lot of the work is done on an hourly basis, and that's why the department each year publishes a manual which prescribes for each different kind of machine the hourly rate that the department will pay.

That has, up to this point in time, largely been left to the decision of the districts under the responsibility of the District Engineer or Assistant District Engi neer, to monitor the allocation of that work. I stated earlier that I prefer that this would be done on a rotational basis, because there are a lot of people who have equipment and would welcome the opportunity to be able to do some work for the department on an hourly basis, but sometimes they're not called. So I think the rotational basis would be the best system, however, that's not used in all districts at this particular time. MR. C.

MANNESS: Well to try and put some specific task to this type of work, are we talking about items like mowing of grass, moving of snow in the wintertime, those types of procedures? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the majority of the mowing, I believe almost all of it, is done by our own - no, the mowing is done through hourly work. The snow clearing is done with our own equipment, in most cases, although additional equipment is needed, trucks sometimes and loaders and so on, and that is then hired on the hourly basis. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Chairman, I would ask the Min ister, first of all, is this ordered and hired by the district engine er, or is some leeway allowed to those supervisors within a yard district? What limits are they expected to work within and who sets these limits? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, unfortu nately, under the last number of administrations, there has not been a set system, to my und erstan ding, of allocating this work. lt has been largely left to the districts to determine how they will allocate this work. That is an area of review; that is an area of concern to me to a certain extent.

As I ind icated, my preference would be that there would be a rotational basis for this, that all those people who are capable of offering the service would have an opportunity to participate. I would like to see that system come into place in the department in all districts, but at the present time, as has been the case for the last 15 years or lon ger, 20, this process has been in place, it's largely up to the districts. Of course, even under the rotational system, I guess it would still be up to the districts, but there would be some system to it and a fairness to it.

The decisions have been left to the districts to make those decisions. lt is one area that I'm having review ed. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to get a better feel ing for the procedure. The Minis ter says, it's left up to the district. Now there are various supervisional areas I imagine within the district and every one of these hourly contracts that are entered into by somebody within a region or within a smaller supervis ed area - under the present situation - does that all come before the district engineer? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: My understanding is that it would not necessarily come before the district engineer in all cases. The assistant di strict engi neer may have responsibility for that area in a district. Perhaps in some areas it's delegated even further. But certainly the district engineer is the responsible person for this in a specific area. There are guidelines as well for work that's done for a particular job. There's a prescribed number of hours that should be req uired to do that job, so there are guidelines in that respect. MR. C. MANNESS: Well, Mr.

Chairman, maybe the Min ister can help me with the terminology to some degree. Are the foremen the same people as the assistant engineers? I would think not. But if they aren 't, do the foremen, the people that are in charge of the yards that are scattered throughout the rural areas, do they have any discretionary spending power or the ability to enter into contracts on an hourly basis for the doing of any maintenance work? 652 HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I should clarify that the district engineer approves all of these through his assistant or himself, and they're all sent into central office, all contracts done on an hourly basis. So they are not just confined in terms of the agreements, the contracts on that basis, to the district. All of that Information is forwarded on. MR. C. MANNESS: A final question, Mr. Chairman.

Is the Min ister sufficiently sure that all individuals who might want to tender on these hourly projects have sufficient information: firstly, that there are some type of operations in which they could find an opportunity on which to bid; and secondly , are they provided with the information that allows them to make an intelligent bid? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The hourly work is simpl y cont racted on the basis of the rates that are published, so there should be no problem with .people understanding what their function is or what their

Monday, 8 Aprjl, 1985 opportunities are in terms of hourly work that they're assigned. They are assigned on the basis of the published rates. Any contra ct entered into by the district, as I said, is then forwarded to the central office and is checked there to see that the rental rates that have been desig nated for that piece .of equipment are th e appropriate rates. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, on what basis up to now has one outfit been selected over another? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Wel l, as I said, in many cases perhaps past experience has dictated that the indi vidual operator or the owner of the equipment has been reliable and has been able to do the work. Perhaps that is often - and is available on very short notice, that kind of thing, so maybe that is very often an important criteria. As I said earlier, my preference would be that there be more of a rotational system for this kind of work in the future, but that is the way it has been done in the past. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(a) - the Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think the Minister has given us some information on this hourly business. I believe, if I'm correct, you said that the decision may be made in the district office, but it is sent on to the central office. Is that for final approval, or is that a sort of an after-the-fact check? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The individual contracts for certain equipment are sent to central office for verification that the proper rate is being charged for the equipment that is designated. So that would be the case with all ·agreements. MR. H.

GRAHAM: When it gets to central office, is that where it stops or does it get to the Deputy Minister's office? HON. J. PLOHMAN: lt doesn't get to the Deputy Minister's office or the Minister's office. MR. H. GRAHAM: So the control stops at the central office. Now who would the people be who would have the final say there? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The Director of Operations would verify that the proper rates were being charged for specific equipment. That's where the final verification would rest.

I should mention that the amount of work that is allocated in this way is only about 5 percent to 7 percent of the total maintenance budget, just to put it in perspective. We're not talking of the whole $50 million or so in the maintenance budget, we are talking about 5 percent to 7 percent of that spread over, of course, the 12 districts across Manitoba. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, we're not talking about $50 million. We are talking probably about $2 million to $3 million. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's right. 653 MR. H. GRAHAM: $2 million or $3 million of work that is done.

On that basis, it's all done on an hourly basis and the selection of the contractor who is going to do it, I want to again ask the Min ister, is the choice of that contract left at the local level, or is it referred to the central office, or does the rate that applies the only thing that is referred to central office? Perhaps the Minister could give us a little more explanation of how it all occurs. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The case is that the central office does not approve or disapprove of the particular indi vidua l or com pany or busi ness that may be undertaking the work. That is done at the district level.

The only portion that is verified or mon itored by the Director of Operations is that the rate that's being charged is appropriate for the equip ment according to the manual that is set out. MR. H. GRAHAM: Well, Mr. Chairman, if the district office has four or five people that are all available and all immediately available for the work and they all would like to do the work, who does the district engi neer go to for final approval of a select ion of one of those contractors? HON. J. PLOHMAN: At the present time and as has been the case, as I've indi cated, for many many years he has gone to no one.

If it's the district engineer who is making that initial decision or if he's getting a recommendation from one of his staff, the decision, as I indicated, rests at the district level. So he is not under the current system required to get approval for which individual he chooses to contra ct with at the present time beyond the district level. He does not have to get approval. MR. H.

GRAHAM: If I heard the Minister correctly, he said that the final decision does not go beyond the district engineer's office, but I believe you also said it may not necessarily have to go to the district engi neer, the decision may be made at a lower level. Is that correct? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I unde rstand that in all districts the district engineer himself would have to give the final approval, but the staff that is assigned those duties could be making the initial arrangements. MR. H.

GRAHAM: Could the Min ister ind icate how far down in the peck ing order below the district engineer you would go to have that discretionary power used? Would it be to a maintenance foreman? Would he have the power to make those kinds of decisions? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The supervisor or superintendent and the foreman do not, to my understanding, make those decisions in any of the districts on their own. They would have to get approval from the assistant district engi neer and district engi neer for entering into their agreements. MR. H.

GRAHAM: Wel l, the Mi nister is now saying that it is only the district engine er that makes the final decision. Is that correct? I think we're running around a bit here.

Monday, 8 April, 1985 HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think that I have been very consistent to what I've said, that the district engineers made the decisions. I think the honourable members can see that quite clearly, that the district engine er is responsible at the district level to enter into those agreements with equipment owners for work to be done.

The supervisors involved may be the ones who make the arrangments and the re commendations to the district engine ers to who is available to undertake certain works, but the final decision in authorization is with the district engineers, as I have stated clearly and consistently here. MR. H. GRAHAM: Wel l, Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask the Minister one other question.

Is it possible, under the present system that you are operating un der, for a flagman whose sole purpose is to wave cars through a construction job and make sure the traffic does not get balled up, is it possible that a flagman could make that kind of decision because his friend happens to have a machine that is readily available and is just the type of machine that they need for this few hours of work? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think the member was being facet ious at any rate with regard to that point.

As we have ind icated, it is the supervisors and the foreman in the area who would make those recommendations to the district engine er to make the decision. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, I was not being facetious at all, and I would ask the Minister to withdraw that HON. J. PLOHMAN: 11 would seem rather unl ikely, let's put it mildly, that a flag person on a particular job would be responsible for the hiring of an individual's piece of equipment. Obviously, it would have to be approved, any decisions made with regard to equipment, through the district engine er, and I have indi cated that. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, obviously, the Mini ster doesn't listen very well. All I asked him was, I said is it possible that such an arrangement could take place, and I would ask the Minister to answer that. HON. J. PLOHMAN: it's a hypothetical question. I don't know what's possible. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, anything is possible. Mr. Mini ster. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Thanks for the help, Mr. Chairman, but I have ind icated that the process rests with the engi neer in the districts for the decisions as to what equipment is engaged for work on an hourly basis. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I am extremely confused, I am sure - maybe I am the only one - but I heard the Minister indic ate that the decision to hire on an hourly rate came from central office; who would be hired came from the district engi neer? Are there two levels of decision-making taking place when it comes to the maintenance work? MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the member please repeat the question. MR. J. DOWNEY: Ye s, Mr. Chairman. If I heard him correct ly, the Minister said that the rate at which the work would be paid came from the central office and who would get the job came from the district engi neer, is that correct? HON.

J. PLOHMAN: Ye s. MR. J. DOWNEY: Is the Minister of Highways satisfied that fairness applies in this particular situation, that there isn't too much discretion left with the district engi neer? Because, after all, when five people put the same rate in, central office would approve five rates, but the individual who is left in the final decision-making could hire his friend or her friend and the ind ividuals who probably are justified in getting a job may not get it Do you not feel there is too much discret ion at a district engineer's level as to who gets the work? Is he satisfied that it's fair? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: The Member for Arthur has made himself very clear. No, I am not satisfied, that's why we are und ertaking a review of those processes. lt's rath er un believable, I guess, tha t the previous government didn't und ertake that review. That process has been in place for an awful long time and I am not convinced that it's fair and I will be looking at ways to make sure that it is fair in the future. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the Mini ster makes reference to the former government, what about the former Minister under his administration? Is he equally as critical of the policies at that particular time?

Who is carrying out the review; is it an in-house review or is he having an external group of people looking at the policies? 654 HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, we have had a commi ttee working on the procedures, district engi neers from across the province, to make re commenda tions as to ways that th is could be allocated. In addition to that, more recently we have the Auditor and the internal auditor doing a review of those procedures as well. So we expect that we will get some good re commendations with regard to the process, and perhaps recommendations that we will be able to take action on very soon.

MR. J. DOWNEY: We ll, Mr. Chairman, the Minister makes reference to the fact that he is having the engineers do the study and the review as to whether or not they should continue to make the decisions or not. Does he feel that that's a fair group of people, and will the Mini ster be prepared to table the report that comes forward from the comm ittee of engineers? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, I have ind icated that there are two parts to it.

I should point out that I had asked for this process to be reviewed some time back and that is the one that the district engi neers have been working on, reporting to the

Monday, 8 April, 1815 Deputy Minister on the recommendations that they may make to change the system to make it more fair and, in addition to that, more recently, the internal auditor and the Auditor have become involved to review the process that is in place as well. So we have, as I said, two parts to that. One has been ongoing for some time and we should be at a stage to review that to make a decision very soon. We will not be getting a formal report that would be released with regard to the district engineers, that is internal work that is going on.

I will be considering it with the Deputy Minister and making the appropriate changes that we feel should be made at that time. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I think the Minister should be aware of the fact that he, as a Minister, gets a report from the department whether he calls it internal or not, it should be made available to the public and to the Legislative Assemb ly. I cannot see why he should be able to withhold that kind of informaticn. In fact, I have further criticism of the Minister. If he . has now had to do an internal audit, have the auditor brought in, why did he not take action quicker?

Did he not get an interim report from the district engineers? Why has he been sitting on this thing? He must have had some indication or some knowledge of reason to take action, and it's dragging on. He's had his district engineers preparing reports. He's not prepared to table them. Is it finished? Is it complete? I mean, after all he saw fit to have his engineers go to work and prepare a report. Well, Mr. Chairman, what I'm asking, is the internal report complete? Why is he not prepared to table it? Is there something that he has to cover up? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, I've indicated clearly that over the past . . . MR. J. DOWNEY: I'm asking some straightforward questions. I want the answers. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think the member is suggesting that perhaps, and clearly, there is nothing to cover up. MR. J. DOWNEY: Well table it then. HON. J. PLOHMAN: And of course he didn't mean to suggest, I don't think, that there was ... MR. J. DOWNEY: I didn't suggest anything. I'm asking a question. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I can say clearly, if the member is saying that I have been delaying over the last 20 years, this hasn't been changed in any substantiv e way.

In the short time that I'v e been there, there have been some initiatives taken to make those changes and to undertake the review that would be required before making any changes to improve the system, and that is being worked on. I will certainly be making it a priority to ensure that any reasonable recommendations that come forward will be acted on as quickly as possible. So I don't think the member is on very firm ground when he talks about delaying. Certainly his colleagues, when they were in government, had an opportuni ty to review those procedures and apparently chose not to do so. 655 MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, I have two questions: will the Minister be making available to the Legislative Assembly the report that the district engineers are preparing; and as well the internal audit that is being carried out by his department? Will he make them available to the legislative members, to the Assembly? HON. J.

PL OHMAN: As I have indi cated, the recommendations would be considered from both the district engineer's recommendations, if we can call it a report , as well as the internal auditor and the Provincial Auditor in their work, and in combination their recommendations will be considered, and following that, a new policy will be put in place and of course I will make that public at that time, which I intended to do. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, that's not good enough, particularly when it comes to the Provincial Auditor doing a review of his department.

Seeing as the Provincial Auditor answers to the Legislative Assemb ly, will that auditor's report of his department be made available to the Legislative Assemb ly, and if not, why not? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the member is changing the direction of his question. For the first while he was asking me whether I was going to make the report of the district engineers public, now he's asking me if I'm going to make the Provincial Auditor's report public, which is being done in conjunction with the internal auditor at the present time. We will consider that. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, the Minister can try to fudge and get around any corner he can to get defence. I ask him the two ques tions, but I am specifically asking him if he is going to table the auditor's report on the review of the activities of his department. The auditor answers to the Provincial Legislature. Is he now saying that he is not going to allow the Provincial Auditor's report to be made public? Is he not going to allow that, or is he going to table that report? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Chairman . MR. J.

DOWNEY: I didn't ask the question of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, I asked the Minister of Highways. Okay, that's fine, if he wants to answer. HON. A. ANSTETT: I have asked to be recognized to engage in the debate in which the member has started. If the Minister chooses to answer - (Interjection) - Mr. Chairman, the purpose of my intervention is to clarify for a member who has been around here a few years, that he seems to be lacking a bit of understanding on the role of the Provincial Auditor.

First of all, I think the member should know it and if he doesn 't, he's sitting there so smugly, he'll learn it tonight, and that is tha t the Provincial Audi tor determines what he tables and presents to the House. No Minister can do that, and no Minister overrides the Provincial Auditor, and this Minister wouldn't ...

Monday, 8 April, 1985 MR. J. DOWNEY: Your Min ister of Finance did. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Chairman, now the member wants to bring in extraneous material like the fact that his Mi nister of Finance, two of them, couldn't get their accounts certified by the Provincial Auditor from 1977 to '81. We couldn't for 1982 until we cleaned up the mess they'd left and they were certified for the first time in 1983-84. MR. J. DOWNEY: That's not true. HON. A. ANSTETT: That is true, and you know it. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we are debating an issue outside the item that we are consideri ng. The Honour able Min ister. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, very clearly, the Honourable Member for Virden seems to be insinuating tha t somehow we would be, from our (Interjection) - Oh, it's the Member for Arthur . I apologize to the Member for Virden. MR. CHAIRMAN: it's the Member for Arthur. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The Member for Arthur seems to be insinuating that somehow I as Minister and the department would have something to hide in regard to this review. That is the furthest from the truth.

We want to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that proper procedures are followed and that there certainly is a fairness in all decisions that are made in the department. That is a very strong belief of mine, and we will take what steps are necessary to do that as a result of this review. it's as I said, I think to the credit of this administration that we're doing that, and certainly one wonders that this wasn't reviewed previously if the honourable members feel so strongly that some steps should have been taken.

We have taken tho se steps, and we will continue to take those steps and ensure that there is fairness and that proper procedures are being followed. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want the record to show that this Min ister of Highways is not prepared to show the public in Manitoba a report that is done by his department on the expenditures of public funds, that he is not prepared to show the public that information. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I have stated, Mr. Chairman, clearly, that is not correct.

The decisions that are made on the basis of the reports and information that we received from our staff and the decisions that are made will be made public. I have indicated that to the member. When decisions are made, I will make those new policy statements public. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, I too JOin my colleague, the Member for Arthur , requesting that the Minister make public the report that will have been 656 prepared by the engineers.

In view of the fact that the Minister by his own indication said that it is a policy that's been in place - I'm talking about the tendering policies - have been in place for 20 years. it covers the scope of various administrations. So quite obviously we're not attempting to place any blame or cast any aspersions toward the Minister at all. We feel it's a policy that has occurred over a number of years and when addressed within an internal review, should be shared with us all. Mr. Chairman, I would ask a question specifically to: (

a) the Maintenance Program. I don't know how the $49-plus million is broken down, but can the Minister indicate what portion of that represents gravel? I can tell him that as a member representing a southern riding that two out of three phone calls that I receive at my residence during an evening are directed towards the condition of the provincial road network. Of course, a lot of that has to do with bridges and a lot of that has to do with the state of the grade in some certain portions, but also a lot of it has to do with the application of gravel on the provincial road network.

Can the Min ister tell me what portion of the program Is being directed to gravel? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Under the normal maintenance section, which is about 50 percent I believe, of the total maintenance expenditures, about $4.5 million in 1983- 84 was directed towards gravel.

Just under $3 million was directed towards dragging; dust control was just under $1 million; shoulders just over $1 million; mowing about $1. 25 million; brushing about $0.75 million; dr ainage and bridges about $1 .2 5 mi llion; signs approximately the same; spring restrictions about $0.75 million; bituminous work about $5.5 million, that's the largest portion. That's under the normal maintenance expenditur es, th e norma l Summe r Mai ntenance Program that is unde rtaken, in 1983-84, just over $4.5 million was spent on gravel. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Chairman, is the Minister then indicating that of the appropriation, $49 million that we are being asked to approve, that there is not an item breakout for the application of gravel, not in'83, not in'84, but in'85? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Certainly we can get the figure, but the proportion would be very similar to the figur es that I just mentioned. I can get the exact figures, but the proportion of the total $50 million is about the same as it was that I just referred to. A MEMBER: Could that be broken down district by district? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. There is a district by district.

Now for dragging and gravel, District 3, by far and away the highest for maintenance for gravel, it is much higher than the average for other districts because of the nature of the roads and the soil conditions in that particular district. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, I'm glad to hear that the Mi nister can provide that information on a district breakout. However, I'm wondering if he'll provide

Monday, 8 April, 1985 it for'84 and also the est imate for'85. The Minis ter makes reference to the proportions not changing significantl y, but I would like to see the raw, actual expenditures by the district for those three years if possible. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we can certainly get that information. As I have in dicated, we haven't changed the standards at all in terms of maintenance work that has gone on during the time that this government has been in power in Manitoba.

So if he's insinuating that perhaps there have been some changes with regard to the apportioning of this work, there hasn't been. it's a reflection of the re quirements and the requests from the districts for their maintenance work, and the proportions generally stay about the same. I believe we have some information for 1984-85, as well as the 19 83-84 figures that I just mentioned to the member . The figure for 1984-85 was just about $4 million for gravel - I have a breakdown for all of those figures - which is slightly lower than 1983-84 but generally about the same p1•oportion.

For the 1985-86, it's just being planned at this time, I don't know whether we have the figures in detail. lt would depend on the circumstances during the year, but there would be a request in on those and we could have the detailed information on the plan that is being prepared for gravel activities. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Chairman, the Minister made reference to my insinuating somet hing. I really wasn't then, but I'll make a statement now that this goes far beyond an insinuation, it's a stated fact.

When we look at $4 million being spent on gravel in 1984 versus $4.5 the year previous and, of course, taking into account inflationary conditions to that point in our history, it is obvious then, when my constituents tell me that the state of the roads within my electoral division are tota!ly inferior to what they were previ ous, obviously I will echo their insinuation or, let's say, their statement and their claim. I would be interested, when possible, if the Minister can provide that same figure for 1985.

That may not occur, of course, during the Estimates process but, if he can provide that to us sometime later on it would be interesting to see whether in fact that particular number is increasing. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I can indi cate to the member at this time, in general terms, that the increase in the maintenance budget this year of almost $2 million includes primarily two areas; one is the surface material, such as, gravel, and the other is shoulder restorat ion. So those two areas will be rece iving priority attention for in creases in the coming year. MR. C. MANNESS: Now may I ask in what districts, Mr.

Mini ster? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The requests will be coming forward, or have come forward, from the District Engi neers as to their re quirements. That is done at that level with the Director of Maintenance, and is not consid ered by myself so I'm not aware of exactly which districts will be recei ving specific additional amounts. 657 I can tell the honourable member, as I mentioned earlie r, that District 3 gets by far and away the majority of the gravel, almost twice as much as some of the other districts, depending on their nature.

So District 3 does get a greater percentage, a greater proportion of the gravel that is re quired. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR. L. HYDE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, a series of questions to the Min ister, Mr. Chairman. First I'd like to start with Highway 430 it is, off of No. 26. lt has been brought to my attent ion, Sir, that the CPR crossing just a half-mile north on 430 off of 26 is in deplorable condit ion. Apparently the crossing planks are anything but secure.

I wonder whether the Minister is aware of this and if some thing can be done in the near future before there's an accident happens at that particular crossing. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We will consider that individual request and that information that the individual member has brought forward. There are always difficulties with crossings with railways, and we are anxious to hear this kind of information whenever there are particular concerns raised. We 'll look into that situation for the honourable mem ber. MR. L. HYDE: Thank you. My second question then to the Min ister, Mr.

Chairman, on the bypass around Portage la Prairie at the lights at 240. If you'll rec all, Mr. Mini ster, I brought it to your attention that there have been a series of accidents, serious accidents, taken place at that int ersect ion. lt was suggested to me by the RCMP that something should be done to that before there are more lives lost at that particular point. I suggested to you, Mr. Mini ster, at one time, that it might be a good move on your part to take and install, I would refer to them, as warning grids on approaching the traffic lights at that int erse ction.

There needs to be some sort of a means of slowing the traffic down just prior to the actual flashing lights. I have been informed that they are referred to as speed bumps - okay? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ye s, well in place at that particular inte rsection is a warning amber flashing light that ind icates that the light is going to be changing, which is one method of signalling to the oncoming motorist that there will be a requirement to stop. But we have used those bumps in the pavement where an individual road is intersect ing with another, and the person driving will have to come to a full stop.

In this case, of course, traffic flows through at 70 kilometres an hour, un less of course the light is changing. So it wouldn't be good practice to apply them to that surface under those circumstances. So we have the advance warning that's in place at the present time which, I think, goes some distance to warning motorists that they will have to stop. In addition to that, I can say that this area is a top candida te for a grade separat ion in the future, the No. 1 candi date I believe. lt will be one that will be considered certainly if we are able to achieve an

Mond•y, 8 April, 1985 agreement with the Federal Government with regard to upgrading the major interprovincial routes. This would be one that would be considered, the top candidate. MR. L. HYDE: May I ask, for considerations for what? HON. J. PLOHMAN: For a grade separation. Sorry, Mr. Chairman, a grade separation or an overpass. MR. L. HYDE: Mr.

Chairman, this is all very well, but I'm sure you are, and your department must be aware of the fact that there have been some serious accidents take place at that particular intersection. lt is obvious to me, and I'm sure it must be to your engineers, that the flashing lights are not satisfactory; they are not doing their job. If it is the slow bumps, or whatever the heck you refer to them as, if they will be more effective, why can't they be installed? A MEMBER: If I hit rumble strips at 70 with my car there'll be nothing left of it. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: They're just not applied on open highw ays where there is not necessarily a requirement to stop. Rumble strips are what I think the honourable member is referring to, and they do shake up the vehicle quite a bit, especially when they're travelling at" 70 kilometres an hour which is the speed limit in that section. So I think that we should stick with the existing policy with regard to the use of those rumble strips, and look at other methods of enhancing the safety as soon as we're able to do so.

As the member knows, a grade separation or an overpass at that area would be many millions of dollars, and that's why we are in the process of discussing these requirements with the Federal Government to have some shared funding with regard to overpasses and grade separations on the TransCanada. MR. L. HYDE: Mr . Chairman, I appreciate th e suggestion by the Min ister that there is consideration being made for grade separations there. I still am not convinced that some thing more couldn't be done toward the slowing of traffic in that intersection, because I'll assure you, Mr.

Mi nister, that I will inform you very quickly should the next accident take place in that place and there are lives lost. I am bringing this to your attention, because you know very well that is a serious situation there. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, I can assure the member that we will have the department look at every possible option with regard to increasing safety at that intersection. lt has received attention in the past with regard to the advanced warning amber light there, and other options will continue to be looked at in the absence of the ultimate solution for that intersection. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 2.(a) - Mr. Min ister. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I just want to, Mr. Chairman, mention that perhaps we have the discussion which could break down into the Winter Roads, Operations and Cont racts, Bridges and Structures and so on through this appropriation, then we can get on to 658 Planning and Design where we can discuss various highways projects. That's really what the honourable member was just discussing here. MR. L. HYDE: I appreciate it's difficult to separate the different programs in this, but I certainly did not want to miss my opportunity to bring that question up.

I have one more, Sir, that probably will come in under Design, where is that going to be, Mr. Chairman? HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's three, No. 3 on Page 94. MR. L. HYDE: No. 3. Okay, that's fine. I also have one here, Mr. Chairman, regarding a problem that a constituent of mine has on 411, that's off of 430 out the St. Ambrose area. I brought it to the Mi nister's attention last summer, in the cou rse of the summer and fall, that a man who has built a home on the nort heast quarter of 36-14-5, he has not got an approach to his property. MR. J. DOWNEY: Shame. MR. L. HYDE: Shame is right.

In order to get into his home he has to travel in through adjoining properties to get onto his own farmsite. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, in the absence of the name, I do seem to recall the correspondenc.e on that from the member, and I believe that there was an approach authorized, unless we're talking about a different one. However, there was no approach that's been put in up to this point, but it has been authorized at that location. MR. L. HYDE: You were right, Mr. Min ister. You did give the authorization to this Mr.

Trost, Alex Trost, for an approach to his property, but also it was going to be entirely at his cost, if you'll recall. - (Interjection) - lt was going to be entirely at his cost, and I believe that the cost of a culvert alone, in order to meet the design and circumference of the culvert, would require a culvert something like the cost of $600 to $700.00. Mr. Chairman, are you not expecting a little much of an individual to foot that bill of a culvert and an approach? A MEMBER: He should have applied to the Jobs Fund. A MEMBER: They have lots of money. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, the procedure is that where an existing approach does not exist that the department does not provide an approach. If an individual chooses to set up his residence at a new location where an approach does not exist he would have to consider, among his costs in setting up his dwelling at that location, the cost of his approach to his new place, so that is standard procedure. This person is not being treated any differently than anyone else with regard to new approaches, new locations. MR. L.

HYDE: Has it not been the policy of your department, Sir, that there is allowed, in a given distance on a particular road, X number of approaches, say it's

Mond•y, 8 April, 1985 a quarter-of -a-mile, I don 't know exactly what? But I believe through correspondence to this gentleman you suggested that there was one crossing not being used, which is something like I'd say a small quarter-of-a mile up road from where he is located, that could be relocated to his position where he's needed it. Is that not possible that you could fulfUI the needs of this man by removing that crossing and bringing it to his location? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, obviously that would not be a cheaper alternative to just putting in a new approach, and as I've ind icated the department, when it is upgrading a road, it replaces those approaches that are there, but we do not build additional approach es, so there is no standard num ber of approaches on a particular distan ce on the highway system. So, in this case, the fact that there was no approach there is sufficient reason that the Highways Department should not be getting into funding additional approaches. We go by the number that has been there in the past. MR. L. HYDE: Mr.

Chairman, is the Minister denying that individual an access to his property? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I have indi cated, Mr. Chairman, quite clearly, that the individual had authorization to put in place an approach . A MEMBER: At his cost. A MEMBER: Of course. HON. J. PLOHMAN: And maybe the Member for Portage will want to make that an election promise that he'll - (Int erjection) - put it in for nothing. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. The Member for Portage has the floor. MR. L. HYDE: Mr. Chairman, I am not satisfied with what the Minister is saying, that he is going to . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: There is a point of order.

The Member for Arthur is raising a point of order. MR. J. DOWNEY: Ye s, Mr. Chairman. lt is normal procedure that discussions are through the chairman. The Minister of Mun icipal Affairs, who should know better, is hollering across the table and should direct his quest ions through you, Mr. Chairman. I, Mr. Chairman, ask you to bring him to order. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the same point of order . HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Chairman, I would take this opportunity on the point of order to apologize to the committee for having followed the example so ably set earlier by the Member for Arthur. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR. L. HYDE: Mr. Chairman, have I got to notify Mr. Trost that this government will not supply him with a suitable culvert and crossing into his property? 659 HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we can do that directly if the member would like. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. The Member for Portage. MR. L. HYDE: It'll be on record that this Min ister will take that notice to Mr. Trost that they will not supply him with the crossing. A MEMBER: In writing. MR. L. HYDE: In writing. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, we will advise - if there is need for further correspondence - the constituent of the honourable member that he is being treated in the same way that anyone else in those situations would be. MR. J. DOWNEY: Un less he was an NDP. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That is absolutely not true. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. The Mem ber for Arthur is out of order. Is the Member for Portage finished with this line of questioning? MR. L. HYDE: No. No, I'm not. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage. MR. L.

HYDE: I just can't believe what this Min ister is saying, and has just finished saying, that he will not supply a property owner with an approach to his property. I will not and cannot believe it. A person who puts up a $30,000 home off a PR road cannot get an approach to his property. I just can't believe it. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the member is misrepresenting again what I said. it's not a case of him not being able to get an approach. He has received authorization to put in place an approach for his property, and that is the standard procedure.

In cases where there is evidence that an approach existed previously and there is some dispute over that, we have investigated and looked at situations, and in some cases have put in place approaches because the evidence or indication was that perhaps an approach did exist and that the person had a case in that regard. But we have not put in place at the cost of the Department of Highways and Transportation new approaches that were not previously in existence in that particular situation.

So this individual that the member is talking about is receiving the same treatment as any other person would, and if the member wishes to change that, of course, he can always campaign on that in the next election. MR. L. HYDE: it's a certain thing, Mr. Chairman. I have personally driven to the area and I know exactly where the crossing that hasn't been used for years apparently is in place today. it's, I'd say, a quarter-of -a-mile further down the road. All I'm asking you, Sir, is that you

Monday, 8 April, 1985 consider removing that crossing, pipe and all, bring it to the site of this here indi vidual who has spent $30,000 on a new home and with no access to his prope rty. That's all I'm asking. Is that too much? Mr. Chairman, it's all right for the Minis ter there to be laughing. HON. J. PLOHMAN: A point of order now. I wasn't laughing, Mr. Chairman. MR. L. HYDE: Not you, Sir, not you. The Min ister of Municipal Affairs. it's a serious situation in this particular area.

There's a ditch in that particular case there, about a six-foot ditch, that this man has to cross over in order to get to his property. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Municipal Affairs. HON. A. ANSTETT: Ye s, Mr. Chairman, I just want to go on record as req uest ing that the Mi nis ter of Highways, if he accedes to this request, should also retroactively accede to my request for the same thing on the road on which I live and to that of every other Manitoban who has been denied the same thing for generations. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Gladstone. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Earlier there was some discussion over the classification of provincial roads, and I am wondering about the classification of Provincial Road No. 340 between Stockton and Tre esbank. HON. A. ANSTETT: A slight water hazard. A MEMBER: A bridge will fix it up. MRS. C. OLESON: it's before you get to the river that I am concerned about. A MEMBER: There is a water hazard before you get there too. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We ll, I don't have the exact figures. If the member would like that specific information, we can get that for her in short order. A call to the office would certai nly get it, or we can get it to her. MRS. C.

OLESON: Ye s, I would like that because there was some problem over that road last summer. In fact, the road was in such poor condition that the council felt that they had to take it upon the mselves to do the maint enace if the Mini ster will recall the correspondence from the Rural Mu nicipality of South Cypress. So I was wondering what the classification of that road was and I would like to also know how often it is supposed to be maintained or dragged, whatever the term is. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mai ntained is good enough. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We will get that information for the honourable member .

I have ind icated what the classifications were and I believe the traffic would 660 probably be between 75 and 250, which would make it a Class 4, which would req uire 20 drags per summer. MRS. C. OLESON: Is the Min ister satisfied that when the road, for ins tance, is classified in a certain way as to how many times it's dragged, is the Minister confident that it actually gets that much maintenance? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I would say, by and large, that would be the case, that they would receive that much maintenance.

In certain situations it's possible that the district engine er would priori ze another road for additional dragging and would perhaps reduce on another road, it's possible. But I can't say with any certainty at this time that it is the case in that particular instance. it's possible that one i s receiving more than its designa ted numb ers. MRS. C. OLESON: No, I don't think so. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I can see from the honourable member's points here that that is not the case and, therefore, we have to raise that with the district, bring that to their attention and see whether they can make provision for additional maintenance work to correct a serious problem. MRS. C. OLESON: In the same area, Mr. Chairman, but on a slightly different topic, I wonder could the Minis ter in dicate to me how much it costs to repair the Trees bank Ferry which was taken out of service late last fall because of its poor condition, shall we put it that way. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ye s, Mr.

Chairman, I believe $29,000 was the cost of repairing that ferry. MRS. C. OLESON: Then could the Min ister in this department tell me if he has comme nced the purchase of right-of-way for a new bridge in that area? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The honourable member will be aware that again we are into the planning and design

section in the program and of course it is in the program, as the member is aware, if she has had an opportunity to look through the program. We have placed that in the program for acquisition of property for the new route that would lead to the location for the bridge. MRS. C. OLESON: But the only thing I could find in the program was an indi cation for an acquisition of right- of-way. Was there actually going to be any commenc ement of work on any building of a bridge this year? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, our intention is to proceed with the building of the bridge, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to have the bridge sitting out in the middle of nowhere. There is going to be a road that's required obviously, to and from the bridge. We are commencing in a logical and reasonable way to obtain the acquisition for that new route, and the bridge would be constructed at the same time as the road would be completed so that the new route would then exist. We are not proceed ing ahead of time with the

Monday, 8 April, 1985 construction of a bridge when there is no road leading to it. MRS. C. OLESON: Okay. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, under that same maintenance sect ion, can the Minister assure us that the ferry will be able to fully accommodate all the traffic that is coming here, that its maintenance has been looked after and that it will accommodate the traffic that will be going across that

section of the province? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ye s, Mr. Chairman, I can give the same assurances that the ferry will offer the same service or perhaps a little better since it has been repaired and as it has in previous years. lt certainly should not be any less because it has received major repairs. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(a) - the Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Before we get off the Maintenance Program, there are two areas that I would like to ask a few questions of the Min ister.

One deals with the Dust Abatement Program that applies on various gravel PR roads, and I would like to ask the Minister if there is any set numb er of times that calcium is applied In the sections in front of farmsteads, etc., where calcium has been used. How often do they apply it during the year? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I should mention to the member that this is an area of priority for the coming year. The current

schedule is once per year in front of yards. However, we are looking at a rather su bstantia l expansion to this program from about $900,000 a year to $1.5 million this coming year, so that should see a substantial incr ease in the number of applications, perhaps in the num ber of applications also in locations of those applications throughout the province, so we are expan ding. But the current requlrment is more standard; lt's once per year.

I just want to ind icate to the previous questioner , as well, with regard to the Tre esbank Ferry I have some additional information; that Is, that the department has provided the R.M. of Cypress $40,000 - $37,000 last year - $40,000 projected this year for operating that ferry, and the hours of operation are from 5:00 a.m. till 1: 00 a.m. which were the hours of operation in the previous year. So specifically in answer to that question in terms of the service that would be provided , it will be the same service and the operating grant will be provided by the department. MR. H. GRAHAM: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I want to thank the Minister for indicating that there may be a change because I believe past experience has shown that the calcium chloride treatment and the policy that has existed up to now has been far from being adequate.

In fact, if calcium was applied and a heavy rain two days later, that was it for the year, there was no chance of getting anything else put back. 661 So I welcome the Mini ster's annou ncement that there is going to be a change in policy, and I would hope that there is sufficient flexibility given so that those people living in the immediate vicinity of a PR road will have some degree of protection from the terrible dust that arises possibly from the oversupply of gravel that is sprinkled on the PR system from time to time, which leads me to the second question, that Is dealing with the traffic gravel that is applied to your PR roads.

I notice from time to time that the government does let tenders for the supply of gravel to be stockpiled for various PAs in various areas of the province. The first question I would like to ask the Min ister is: what is the classification of gravel that is used? Does it vary in any significant degree from other gravel that is used, say, in a highway construction program? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There is a substantial difference between the gravel that is used in the construction of roads to that that is used on the surface, depending on the graveL The gravel that is used in construction, of course, as an aggregate is often screened and, of course, has to be of certain specifica tions; the gravel that is applied to the surface can vary, does not have such stringent controls on it. lt can vary with the amount of shale content, for example, the size of the aggregate from place to place in the province depending on what is avai lable.

So there wou ld not be th e same specifications on surface gravel as there is for use in aggregates used in the construction, I should say. I did want to mention one other point rega rding dust control that the member made a comment about, that we are also looking at the possibility of greater use of another dust palliative other than calcium chloride, that being lignal-s ulfate which is a byproduct of the pulp ind ustry and is also available. We want to do some testing with it, some has been done. There is also major testing done under ARTAP on the use of dust control products.

We are going to be looking at expanding the use of that particular kind as an alternative to calcium chloride. Therefore, it may have certain qualities and others may have certain qualities that would make them stand up for a longer time in certain instances, in certain weather characteristics, better than the one that we use now, primarily calcium chloride. MR. H. GRAHAM: I've noticed over the years that there seems to be a changing pattern developing in the application of traffic gravel to the various PAs.

Could the Mini ster ind icate what the present rate of application is of traffic gravel on the provincial road system, or does it vary? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, there are standards that have been in place for the aj)pllcation of gravel over the years, and so it should not have varied considerably since the advent of the maintenance management system in the early '70s. That is that it's applied on the basis of cubic yard per two-lane mile. The road class, Class 3, would warrant 100 cubic yards per two-lane mile; Class 4 with less traffic would warrant 85 cubic yards; and the Class 5 would warrant 75.

Those standards have been in place and continue to be in place. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, is the Mini ster saying that 75 yards is the minimum amount that can be applied to a PR road?

Monday, a April, 1985 HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, what I am saying is that is the standard that is used. This can vary, just as dragging could vary depending on specific situations in a district, but that is the standard that is applied to those roads, as I have indicated, on the basis of the classification. lt's rather close in comparison to the Saskatchewan standard as well. As a matter of fact, Saskatchewan would apply slightly less in terms of cubic yards. For a Class 3 road, they would apply about 90 cubic yards per mile as versus our 10 0. A Cl ass 4 road in Saskatchewan would warrant 75 versus our 85.

A Class 5 road would warrant 55 versus our 75. So the standard that is applied in Manitoba is slightly better than in Saskatchewan, but that is the standard that is used. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, is the Minister telling me that standard applies everywhere, or is the district allowed to vary that? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The districts are allowed to vary that if the conditions warrant it. MR. H. GRAHAM: And what would the conditions be that would allow an engineer or a district to change that if it was downgraded? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I don't understand the question, if it was downgraded. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, I have had complaints brought to me by people that are in the gravel trade that say they can't even apply two truckloads to the mile. That makes it exceedingly difficult for the person applying th e gravel to spread it tha t thinly . Two truckloads to a mile doesn't seem like very much gravel to me. There is the adde d pro blem that, if there are telephone or hydro lines anywhere, it does cause a further disadvantage to the trucker if he is using a hydraulic lift box, rather than a belly dump. But there are, I know in some areas, places where they're asking for 30-35 yards to the mile.

As far as gravelling a road, I think it's just a waste of time and money to put that kind of amount on a road. I'm sure it doesn't doesn't impr ove the quality of the road at all; in fact, all it does is provide a few loose stones to break a few more winds hields. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, certainly gravel is necessary to keep the roads in any kind of driving condition, and especially in certain soil conditions where there is a lot of clay, for example, additional gravel may be required. The amount of rainfall might determine how much gravel is required.

Exceptional truck traffic or gravel traffic over a particular road may require that additional gravel is required . We also have a system of using a machine called a sloper to retrieve gravel that has been thrown off the road so that it can be reused. That is brought back up on the road where it can be used and saves an awful lot of dollars each year on gravel, and we have to remember that we're talking about these applications being applied every year.

So, cumulatively, if we retrieve a good portion of it each year we should be maintaining a proper amount of gravel on the road. lt is necessary to apply it though every year, or as close to that on a consistent basis so that it doesn't deteriorate. 662 MR. H. GRAHAM: Well, Mr. Chairman, the Minister can tell us that they have their standards and that, but I know that the travelling public and the people of Manitoba know that the provincial road system is not improving; it is degenerating. There is insufficient traffic gravel being applied.

Maybe you don't find it in the· Red River Valley, but if you come into the western part of Manitoba where there is a large - I wouldn't call them boulders -but there are numerous stones used in the building of the roads. We now find that many of the provincial road systems, the travelling public is not travelling on gravel at all, t hey are travelling on buried boulders, and it is exceedingly hard on vehicles.

So I would ask the Minister to seriously consider his maintenance program because it is proving that it is not sufficient, and I would hope that the Minister would do something about it because our provincial road system is slowly sinking into the mire of being an increasing liability to the public every day. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr . Chairman, just in response to that.

Of course, the most expensive solution is upgrading all those roads and that is very expensive, requiring additional right-of-way and then building the road to a higher standard or restoring a road to the standard that it was at one time before it deteriorated over a number of years. However, I believe as the mem ber does that as the road system becomes older, as it ages, that there has to be more effort made at maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing roads in the absence of being able to upgrade all of those roads.

So it would seem logical that the standards should be reviewed for certain roads, and I think that flexibility exists in the current system. But I am interested in determining, as well, whether we should be increasing the amount of gravel and dragging and other maintenance operations to meet the needs of the roads today as they exist because of the fact that there has been a lot of traffic over them over the years, and they are deteriorating because they can't be upgraded to meet the

schedule that we would all like to see. So we will review those standards. But as I have indicated, they have been in place for many years and we have not reduced them. If anything, this coming year we're expanding the area of surface gravel, as I indicated earlier. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll have to go back to my opening remarks and the remarks lately of the Minister. There is no question about it, in order to bring our roads back to an acceptable standard, it's going to require a fairly large expenditure.

He's going to have to convince his Cabi net colleagues and the Premier that he has to have all of the money that a great number of the people feel Is jus tly his out of the taxation revenue, plus any amount that he can convince them to put in there from the Jobs Fund in order to increase his budget substantially more than the $2 million that we've got in it this year. lt's going

to take $20 or $30 million a year more to bring the roads up to any standard. But to carry along the remarks of the Member for Virden, the Mini ster mentioned on road maintenance the sloper that retrieved gravel from the edges of the road and brought it back into use.

Also when that sloper is at work - and I'm sure thel'e is one particular case in my area that the Minister has had brought to his atten tion very forcibly - it also retrieves all the broken beer bottles and places them on the road, and those farmers with rubber tired machines are faced with many many hundr eds of dollars in fixing their bloody tires when they're trying to get their machines to and from their various fields. That particular

section of the road, and I'm happy to see that there is acquisition of right of-way in the program,. Mr. Chairman, it may alleviate an awful lot of these problems. But on that same stretch of road, last year there was applied there 165 yards of gravel on th ree miles, that's just probably a little bit thinner than the application the Mem ber for Virden was refe rring to. But that particular gravel caused more problems than it solved. The gravel was put on the road and imme diately there was a fairly heavy rain, and that

section of the road turned automatically into a grease spot. There was a lady driving a van that very nearly went into the ditch, and there was a very steep grade there. 11 would have obviously overtu rned. She had two or three children in the van with her. 11 could have been a very very serious accident. The complaints were brought to me about that gravel, and it was taken from a stockpile.

I had the gravel tested at my own expense. 11 was put on there as surface gravel and the testing came back that at best it was a base gravel that had been used, I think, in the previous cons truction of a road further down, it had been used as base gravel. · That was applied to the road as surface gravel and could have resulted in a very very serious condition on that road. But there was so much clay in it, it automatically became just a greasy road when it got wet. 11 was just of no value putting the gravel on there at all. They might as well have saved their money as putting that particular gravel on there.

Now I don't know how many situations there are. I was going to bring it up under materials earli er, Mr. Minis ter, but while we're on this particular item we could maybe cover it here. On Page 32, I noticed under the budg etary cutbacks of the construction season necessitated a red uction of quality control, and indicating that it had been working about 50 perce nt. I just wondered how many tests are conducted on the various gravel that's being used, and how often are they done. Just to carry on, Mr.

Chairman, I know crushing is very expensive, but maybe in the long run the expensive crushing to provide a top notch grade of gravel in the long run may be a wise expense rather than using some of the particularly low grade types of gravel that we're getting, and I know in some areas gravel is very very hard to come by. I have one municip ality that absolutely has no gravel in the municip ality at all and it's becoming pretty much of an expense to them. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: First of all, this individual in the situation that the member is refer ring to can be looked 663 into and I am sure that every attempt is made to apply the proper gravel that's required. I am sure that the district would have heard about this particular situation after that happened. My understanding is that when gravel and aggregate is being crushed that there is testing going on at the time that it's taking place to ensure that it meets a certain standard.

I am sure, as well, that the aggregate is tested from a new source when the department opens up a new gravel pit area, but that is something that is done initia lly, and I don't know if it's done in each individual case, each truckload that is taken out. I could get that information and if it isn't tested frequently enough we will certainly see whether that is a problem, and yielding at least these conditions that the member is talking about. MR. D.

BLAKE: I think in this particular case it was probably something that had to be done maybe fairly quickly and it was probably a bit of a quick fix to get that gravel because it was handy and use it and it just was terribly poor quality gravel. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(a)-pass. 2.(bX1); 2.(bX2) Winter Roads: 100 Percent Provincial. Shareable with Canada - the Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Yes, the Minister can probably give us some comment on what was accomplished under this particular heading and then, if any of my colleagues have questions we can ask them after we have had the Minister's program under this item.

HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ye s, there are approximately 18 separate sect ions of contracts that have been done under the Winter Road Program and the total cost of them was in the neighbourhood of $2,300,000, which was 50 percent recoverable from the Federal Government. They involved sections that I could enu merate to the members if they would like to have that kind of detailed information, or if they want to ask me some specific questions. I can say, though, that we had an excellent year for winter roads.

We received a lot of good feed back on the early date that they were open in the middle of January and, in some instances, the Hudson Bay Company had ind icated to us that they were very pleased with the fact that they were open early and they were able to get their stock in early and it reflected in lower prices to their customers. So I think it was a very successful year in terms of the Winter Road Program in Northern Manitoba. MR. D. BLAKE: Mr. Chairman, I think we are in terested in how many miles of winter road were put in and who the cont ractors were and how many miles each contractor had.

How many contracts did the Native people handle this year, Mr. Chairman, and things of that nature we are inter ested in? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The major con tract was let to the No rwin Construction Company and they do 831 kil ometres valued at $1. 356 million, all of that on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. 11 inv olves a numb er of bands who got together to form the company, Norwin

Monday, 8 April, 1985 Construction Com pany, that contracts this work each year. lt is composed of the Hollow Water Indian Reserve No. 10, the Bloodvein Indian Reserve No. 12, Berens River Indian Reserve No. 13, Poplar River No. 16, Little Grand Rapids No. 14, the Paungassi Indian Settlement, Red Sucker Indian Settlement and Island Lake Indian Reserve No. 22. They are all a part of this organization, the Norwin Construction Company, and they do sections that I could outline from Hollow Water to Bloodvein, Bloodvein to Little Grand Rapids, Little Grand Rapids to St.

Theresa Point, and so on and so forth, right through to Berens River to Poplar River. So that is the largest contractor and that contractor looks after the whole area on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. As I indicated, the contract prices for that have not increased for the last three years. However, we have applied, I believe, a .25 percent increase for the coming year, and reflect the fact that there has been no increase for the past three years. There is also a contractor, Tom's Repair and Rental, who does the South Bay to South Indian Lake winter road, 13 kilometres, a total cost of $1 8,000.00. MR. D.

BLAKE: Who was the contractor there? HON. J. PLOHMAN: lt is Tom's Repair and Rental. The bid price is $28,965.00.

There is also one from Oxford House to kilometre 36, the contractor is Gilb ert North; 36 kilometres of winter road, the bid price of $54,000.00; from kilometre 36 to God's Lake Narrows was done by the God's Lake Narrows Indian Band at a bid price of $92,000.00; the winter road from Cross Lake to kilometre 64 is a bid price of $86,000 for 64 kilometres, the Peme chikamik Deve lopment Corpora tion; from kilometre 64 to Hayes River, 92 kilometres this past year for $1 17 ,000, the bid price; Hayes River Crossing to the junction of Oxford House to God's Lake Narrows winter road, 50 kilometres, $7 1, 000 by the Oxford House Band Council; Gold Trail Hotel Ltd. does the Ferry Landing Mile 81 to York Landing to llford, 64 kilometres for $88,000.00.

The rest of it is Norwin. MR. D. BLAKE: The contract with Norwin, it's not tendered, it's a let contract. How do you establish the price on that? You mentioned it hadn't gone up for some years, although with some variation. Are they able to perform the work in satisfactory order and make a profit at it? Is it a break-even situation where they provide some employment for their people there? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: 1t is set on a pre-unit basis, both kilometres and width of the right-of-way that is cleared, that is provided, and we have had varying success over the last number of years with it, depending on the amount of additional equipment that is required to be called in to assist, which is taken off the price that they bid if they are not mee ting certain requirements, especially if it's getting late in the season.

That wasn't necessary this past year, so they may have been able to make a profit on it, but they have had some difficulties in the past, and we're trying to work with them to assist them in ensuring that their equipment is ready and that they're able to undertake the work in a businesslike way. lt's improving, especially this past year. There has 664 been a rather substantial im provement in the work that was done in terms of the supervision and the speed with which it was accomplished. So I'm not certain whether they are making a substantial profit, but they are putting people to work during that time. MR. D.

BLAKE: Is there any government equipment used on this construction section? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I believe that they do stage certain · pieces of government equipment at certain times, depending on the situation as I indicated earlier. The department will come in with equipm ent to assist if that's necessary. However, they have purchased most of their own equipment. MR. D. BLAKE: When the government equipment comes in there to assist, how is that charged out against the contract price? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: My understanding is that the work that is done is charged against the appropriation, and their price is reduced correspondingly if they haven't completed the work that was required. MR. D. BLAKE: lt would be on the going hourly rate for the types of machines then. HON. J. PLOHMAN: They are paid on a kilometre basis to construct the road, and then they're paid to maintain it on a weekly basis, to maintain lt thereafter. If they aren't able to do that, then the equipment from the Highways Department certainly is called in to assist on it and then that is deducted from the price. MR. D.

BLAKE: So there is a continuing mai ntenance charge over and above the actual cost of construction. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, that's in their entire bid price. lt's included in the bid. MR. D. BLAKE: lt's included in the bid. This covers the yearly operation of that road. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. D. BLAKE: Because the road obviously is going to disappear in another month or two. You start all over again next year. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's one of the hazards of winter roads. MR. D. BLAKE: lt's a little more costly to put a whole road in there.

We would require a considerable number of bridges to put a road up through that particular area. lt's a little easier to do it in the wintertime, I suppose, when you can wait till it freezes and slide along on the ice. I suppose we're going to adjourn, Mr. Chairman, at 10 o'clock, are we? There are some other questions on ... MR. CH AIRMAN: What is the pleasure of the comm ittee? it's now 10: 00 p.m.

Monday, 8 April, 1985 The Member for Virden. MR. D. BLAKE: The Member for Morris won't be here tomorrow, and there are one or two questions he would like although the House Leader suggested we quit at 10 o'clock. But if you wanted to carry on ... HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, we can go - well, go ahead. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Muni cipal Affairs. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Chairman, I don't think there would be an objection on either side if there were cert ain items that members had questions on and they wanted to compl ete that questioning that we continue for a short period on.

I don't think when we are in Committe e of Supply that 10 o'clock is an alarm bell. lt is certainly not our intention - and the House Leader in the opposition and I have discussed this - to sit until midnight or anything like that, but if there are a few questions that members wish to pursue we didn't view 10 o'clock as fixed. We certainly don't want to go late. MR. CH AIRMAN: We can accomm odate some questions, espec ially the member who will not be here tomorrow. The Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have two questions of the Mini ster on the Winter Roads.

Is the unit price that is used in these contracts consistent from one contra ct to another for the various pieces of equipment, and is th at price con sistent with the

schedule that is used for all other contractors in the Province of Manitoba on hourly rates? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The unit price has been established as a result of experience over the last numb er of years. lt varies between cont racts depen ding on the conditions; a road over an open lake being somewha t di fferent to cons tr uct than a road th rough hilly conditions or forested areas and so on and swampy areas that are very difficult sometimes.

So it varies in terms of the unit price, but they are paid on the amount of work they have accomplished per kilometre according to the specificat ions that have been set out, the specified width. When that is accomplished, the progress payment is made. Obviously, these prices don't correspond to the unit payments to contractors throughout the province because they're doing different kind of work. lt is not done on an hourly basis for the machines used; it's a contract, based on the amount of work accomplished. MR. H.

GRAHAM: A seco nd question, when the Mini ster ind icated that on occasions for maintenan ce purposes highways equipment has been used in the past, is that charged out at the same hourly rental rate as applies to the construction indu stry with your hourly rental rate? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We use the same hourly rental rates, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Morris. 665 MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I won't belabour the sitting of the committee. My questions are mainly directed towards the area of Desi gn.

If it is that the engine ers within the Design Department are going to be present during the consideration of the Construction Program, then I can certainly postpone my questions until that time. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The Director of Planning and Design is here tonight. We hope to consider all of the areas or most of the areas in the Construction Program under Planning and Design which is probably going to be dealt with tomorrow. I understand the honourable member has ind icated he won't be here tomorrow. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minis ter of Natural Resources. HON. S.

USKIW: lt is my understanding that when we deal with the whole construction component that the Design people will be here as well, so that will go beyond tomorrow though. I don't think we'll finish that tomorrow. HON. J. PLOHMAN: If the assumption is that we would go past tomorrow on the construction program, then the member will have an opportun ity. MR. C. MANNESS: I'll have an opportuni ty, I'm sure. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Wednesday is bills, I understand, so we won't be on Wednesday . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Can we pass this item now? 2.(b)( 1) pass; 2.(b)(2)- pass. We will start tomorrow with 2.(c)( 1) and 2.(c)(2).

Committee rise. SUPPLY - HEALTH MR. CHAIRMAN, P. Eyler: The committee will come to order. We are considering the Estimates of the Department of Health, Item 1. (c) - the Minister of Health. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I think before the dinner hour we were talking about research and planning, and it was the will of the committee and my suggestion that you allow quite a bit of latitude on this issue because, after all, we're talking about the direction the government is going in the planning and so on. I'll give the health critic of the opposition a chanc e to put his remarks on the record.

I don't want to prolong this too much. I think it's obvious that our understanding of planning is not the same as the opposition, and theirs, of course, is not the same as ours. I would certainly agree that there has been some exaggera tion, but I won't limit it to the past when this side was on the opposition of some of the things that were said and some of the things that are being said, some of it by the leader, the point that I made. Now, that is exactly in the same vein. I choose to think that this was done with the best intention. I won't imply too many motives.

There is always a bit of partisan politics, and the point that I made is that things change once you've been in volved

Mond•y, 8 April, 1985 in it, the same as the . . . , the former Member for Fort Garry, who became a different person in opposition in opposing as a health critic, he was before he had the respons ibil ity. I think the same is true of me. The member was saying himself that I was the main offender when it came to some of the things that were said. And now, my friend, up to a certain point, is doing some of the same things. I think that he'll go through the same thing if someday he ever becomes the Minister of Health. So that is understandable.

I want to say also that at no time am I -if I give that impression I want to correct it fairly fast -crying the blues and saying people are not fair to me at all. I am suggesting that I will say when somebody is exactly the opposite of what I've said or something that is wrong, I think that's wrong, it doesn't matter who they do it to. That, to me, is trying to mislead the people and that's something the Member for Pembina seemed not to like at all, according to his speech in the epitaph that he used during his description of some of the members.

So, again, I had a paper that I was going to read, but at this time I won't. I can give the information of some of the work that has been done by the planning. There are many committees that are reporting now, and the main point. Of course, we have to look at the day to day routine, call it plan and call it strategy, but I am referring mostly of what are we going to do to preserve the good system that we have in Manitoba.

And the Manitoba system four years ago was not falling apart during the term of the Conservatives, and it's not falling apart today. lt leaves to be desired, and it always will be like that, but it's still one of the best, if not the best in Canada and amongst the nations of the world. Now, I think that some of the provincial Ministers are pretty close to surrendering or saying that this is too costly. There's no way. lt's too rich for us, that we can't keep it up.

I choose to agree with them that it's a very difficult thing, it is very costly and there is no guarantee that we could keep on the way we're doing now. I chose, and I think in the presentation that I have made that my friend I think saw that I talked about the crossroad, and the decisions are very important that we could do what we're doing now, nothing more, nothing less.

I think I gave the example that if we do nothing but what we are doing now, not even any increase in salaries, not even inflation, nothing like that all, just the formula for the beds and so on to take care of the same guidelines that we have now to take care of an aging population, nothing else, that alone would cost us .25 billion in the next 10 years.

Now as I said earl ier, if we weren't going to raise anything, just what we are doing now -in other words, do nothing -or if we're going to keep on the way we're doing now, well then that would be 3.44 billion; that's also impossible and to cap it, that's not an option. If we capped it, it actually would be going down. So that leaves only one alternative, to change the motivation of size starting with the consumer, then going with the providers of service.

I think a formula -and that's where I was inviting the honourable member - it would be naive on my part to think that people are not going to make their brownie points especially before an election so I'm not suggesting anything that is not feasible, but I'm saying that in certain areas I think we could agree, no matter who it is. 666 lt's true that in the past, not this party and the other party has done it, but I think that there is a signal going out that, what are we going to do?

Do we want to keep on in this, or do we want to try to, together, safeguard a program system that is geared to the heart of the people of Manitoba? I think that at least we should make an effort. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. There should be some kind - maybe that's what I meant when I'm talking about getting together - maybe some kind of a council of different people from different providers of services and so on to meet at least a few times, some conference or something, where we could put our thoughts on paper and see if we can get together. That is being done to a certain point.

There was a study promoted what we did at St. Benedict and called the di fferent people in the administration. We also had Dr. Evans, not my colleague Dr. Evans who is well known in this field. The St. Boniface Hospital had a full day when both the Federal Minister and myself were there and the different invited guests and I'm suggesting that maybe that should be done with the two parties.

If there is a change in government, if there is a change the party then would know what was going on. lt would feel part of it. lt would feel that he would have something to do with it, not to cause all these four or five years of complete loss. lt might be that certain things will be changed and all the work done for nothing, and we'd have to start all over again. Unfortuna tely , that's what we seem to do in government. lt seems that we have a mandate. lt takes us two or th ree years to get organized, and then we're finally in full swing but not quite ready to act.

There's a change of government and the government starts all over again and that to me, is not a necessity. Still I'm sure there will be many many areas of disagreement. We'll have enough to suit us and be able to make a different presentation to the public of Manitoba, but at least on certain things I think we can and we should go in the same direction because I think we're both committed to protecting our system, at least in this province. I haven't heard anywhere of any party that is saying, let's do away with this. I have heard it In other provinces, as I say.

The federal parties have all pretty well been together on it, as I said before the dinner hour. So that is the suggestion that I make. lt's not a scheme to try to get the people to go easy on me or anything like that, I don't expect that, especially knowing the Member for Pembina and the House leader, I know that won't happen. In fact, I would be a bit disappointed. We keep it honest, I think that we can have some darn good discussions, at least a few of them, and I would welcome that. But on some other area, I think that we should try at least. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. What have we lost? Nothing.

So, Mr. Chairman, I will have other occasions to talk about the construction. We've talked about that. I don't think it would be proper for me to start answering that. Those were mostly the opening remarks of the member which certainly he was expected to make, and he certainly had all the rights in the world, but we'll have other occasions to go into detail, and I would like to follow the procedure like we did in the past and try to go line by line. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina.

Mond•y, I April, 1115 MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Over the supper hour I sort of reflected on some of the responses that the Minister of Health had given this afternoon, and in some regards I became a little troubled with some of the responses. Mr.

Chairman, before I get into that, I think it's interesting to note that on Monday when the Minist� indicated the reason, the rationale, for bringing in the new per diem user fee to the chronically ill and our mental health patients was that eight other provinces had the same kind of a fee in place, and Manitoba therefore was one of the last holdouts, so that justified bringing in that sort of fee. Now, Mr.

Chairman, that becomes troubling because those are exactly the sorts of comparisons that the Member for Transcona and others, and I don't say the Minister of Health, because I think he did have a realization of the the heralds of the system and was maybe less vocal in what his caucus would have liked him to have been in opposition. But, now, in order to fund a system, which by the Minister's own projections that he laid out to the Union of Manitoba Municipalities back in November of 1984, the funding demands of · the system as is are almost mind boggling.

The Minister is searching, along with the department, to find new monies because he can't talk to his Treasury Board chairman and get the kinds of additional funding that he may want to have to eliminate some of the problems identified this afternoon so that we are down in the planning of funding, if you will, for the department now to searching out new sources of revenue. One of them, and the Minister didn't have the answer, which was a little bit astounding the other day that a veteran Minister did not have the answer as to how many dollars the new chronic care per diems were going to raise.

I realize you'll give that to me now, and it was skilfully unknown the day we posed the question to you. - (I nterjection) - Well, you've been a veteran Minister of Health and you skilfully "unknow" quite a few things. When it's convenient not to have an answer, the Minister of Health does not have an answer. The Minister of Health did not have the answer as to what the dollar implications were of his introduction of the per diems, 15.25 per day, for those chronic care patients who are not panelled for personal care home patients and for mental health patients in institutions over a year.

But the problem that the Minister has with the system is a financial one in some regards. He has imposed that new form of user fee in order to try to overcome some of those financial problems. lt is considered on this side with something of a jaundiced eye when the Minister justifies the imposition of that new fee on the standpoint that eight other provinces in Canada have a similar fee, hence it would be alright for Manitoba to have it.

But those eight other provinces, the majority of them I presume, will be provi nces with Progressive Conservative admi nistrations, something this New Democratic Party admin istration often decries for their policy direction. You often hear a great tirade against British Columbia, against Saskatchewan, against Alberta, against Ontario for their premiums. etc., etc .. because these provinces don't run a clean ship in health like Manitoba does.

But yet, to justify about $3.5 million of additional revenue to the department, the Minister says simply well we're just doing like the other provinces do. 667 You justified your imposition of the per diems on the basis that eight other provinces have those kinds of charges to chronic care patients, and that justified the move in Manitoba. You can't have it both ways once again. You can't condemn Conservative administrations provincially for actions and then, all of a sudden when you're doing something similar, embrace them. Either they're wrong all the time, or they're right all the time. Mr.

Chairman, that wasn't really what I wanted to get to. What sort of troubled me this afternoon was the Minister of Health made a statement, and he'll correct me if I don't paraphrase this correctly, but basically I think the record will show that he indicated that he wasn't going to get into this position where he, as Minister of Health, was going to be blamed for all the problems that were in the system; that Bud Sherman as Minister of Health, he took it upon his own shoulders every problem there was and he personally wanted to try and solve them.

Well I find that a little bit strange because it seems to me that, when you're the Min ister of a department, that's where the buck stops. If things are happening within the department, the Minister is the one that ultimately is responsible. If he's not responsible for his actions, either he shouldn't be there or the staff that brought the actions on shouldn't be there. The two can't co-exist. Mr. Chairman, the Min ister used this argument rather skillfully the other day, and it was in a question that I was posing to him about the negotiations with the Chiropractic Association on their fee

schedule - (Interjection) - this is Planning. Mr. Chairman, the Minister ind icated that the contract that was signed which it's alleged was broken by the government, the Minister conveniently fended off and said, oh no. That was signed by the Health Services Commission, and he didn't have anything to do with it. The only problem is that his Deputy is also Chairman of the Health Services Commission, and his Deputy signed the contract. You know, if the Deputy Isn't responsible for contracts he signs as Chairman of the Health Services Commission, then we've really got a system in di sar ray.

The Mi nis ter can't avoid th e responsibility of action in this department, and he can't criticize a person like Bud Sherman that took his department seriously enough that, when accusations were levelled, he got to the bottom of it. He wasn't afraid to shoulder some of the responsibility for actions that were happening in the Health Department by government decision. Mr. Chairman, no one can tell me that wasn't a government decision to renew the fee

schedule to the chi ropractors. I just want to cl ose with that remark, that I didn't very much enjoy the Minister of Health criticizing the former Minister for being too responslble for the Health Department and bei ng personally responsible for decisions and actions that had taken place. That, I believe, is a role of a member of Cabinet, not something that one should be criticized for. Mr. Chairman, I had posed a question to the Minister, and he might be able to answer it now. Of the 11 people in Research and Planning, could the Minister indicate who the director is and who the people are that are involved?

HON. L. DESJARDINS: I'll start by giving the answer that I forgot earlier, and then I want to make comments on some of the things that were said.

MondaJ, 8 April, 1885 The staff- there are 11 , and one vacant. There's one director; one assistant director, one senior economist, one senior analyst/research eval uation, four program analysts, one administrative officer and two secret aries. Now, Mr. Chairman, I know tha t my gi ft for communi cation is not good. Either I misunderstood or my honourable friend is purposely pre tending; he's giving me too much credit and he's more of an expert, and is purposely misreading what I said.

What I said before the dinner hour, what I said last year, what I said to the former Member for Fort Garry, is that it's not a one-man operation. I'm not talking about the department. At no time have I no t accepted full resp onsibility of all the staff. I accept that. That's the department. That is our respon sibility. That's not what I was saying at all. I was saying that when the Minister is saying, I'm going to stop this -t his decision of a board of a hospital or a different group such as that - I'm saying that all these people are working togeth er.

And as with a school division, if you give a school division some respo nsibility, then you don't take them over; that doesn't mean you can't work with them. That doesn't mean that there is some thing radically wrong, that you're not going to try to change and talk to them. But I think that there was overreaction at the time that he was asked a question in the House. Right away, he's going to stop this without even first talking to the board. And I didn't criticize him; I just told him that I wouldn't be caught doing that; I think that would be wrong. There's nobody that can do that.

I think he got in trouble because of that, things that were not his responsibil ity. That was what I am trying to say. If we say you've got so much money to run the hospital, I can't start dictating to them every single thing they're going to do. That is the point I was making. Now my responsibility and the responsibility of my staff, if they make a mistake, I pay for it. They make enough good decisions and good advice then I'm the winner in the long run anyway. They'v e made mistakes. I'm not one that's going to sell my staff to protect myself, far from it.

Now, the fact that my friend is saying that I did not give the information. I've got the information now. There'll be $3.5 million revenue and that is divided approximately 50 percent with the chronic and mental patients. Now the point that I was trying to make is, it was immaterial. Of course, it was very important to get this . . . but the principle was right. I have no hesitation with that at all. lt is not utilization fees as we know it in Manitoba at all. Utili zation fees. we usually refer to utilization fees where some thing is as a deterre nt.

Some call it a deterrent fee, and something that will encourage people to stay away. Now if you do that, for instance, in an acute hospital, that is a utilization fee. If you're saying, well it's going to cost you $5 for every day in the hospital or in extra billing. it's not an ideology hangup that I have. lt is dangerous, because it will not affect the Member for Pembina and myself. I will not stay away to save five bucks if I have to go to the hospital or go to see a doctor, I won't, but some people will. Some people and, believe me, there are some people that can't afford it. They will not go.

Then it will cost the public even more mone y, and these people are not getting the same kind of service because they can't afford it. 668 I guess it's a bit like the private schools, at the risk of starting an argument with the people on my side. The same comparison, I guess. That is not the same thing at all. Now we have charged , nobody's ever questioned that. We were the first province to ensure the personal care home. We were one of the first provinces, not the first, to bring in Pharmacare.

There has been, technically the word - what is it? - utilization fees is correct. lt is when you're using it that you pay for it, but the connotation that term has here in Manitoba, it is somet hing that will keep people away. There is it somebody that you pay a certain amount. You pay in Pharmacare. There is a deduct ible. Then they pay 20 percent, and you pay the rest. Now we could not charge in the past. lt was not accept able because of the method of financing the system. Now we're saying that somebody - and let's take those over 65 years old for instance.

They are given by the public an old age pension and a minimum income if they have nothing at all. What is that for? What is the public, what are the people of Canada giving that pension to every body? To guarantee that they will have at least a minimum to take care of their needs. The main needs of course are board and room and, in the case of sick people, the medicine that you need and the health care. The health care is already taken care of, but we add a little more that anybody in an institution gets all their medical needs, the drug needs free of charge. They get their board and mom.

So what Is the necessity? Why should the public, the tax payer , make a contribution of a pension to these people when that is their home? That is the big difference bet ween a hospital and an institution wh ich becomes your home. Unfortuna tely, that's where you're going to spend the rest of your life. So we are saying that we couldn't do it before. Now we can, because that formula was changed. We're saying that you have the same people who are over 65 who can't take care of themselves, either because of age - and besides that, they have more problems because they are mentally ill and they need care.

Does it make any sense to say, the same people, the same age, are getting the supplement, they are getting the pension, but you don't need any mental care, you pay. Now you, you need all the care, plus mental care, and you don't pay. You know I am ready to defend that anywhere, anyplace, anytime, and I don't care if we do not pay. I don't think it is fair. I think the people could protest if they are saying why do I have to pay for this person who is being giving him even more care. lt's costing you more per day. it's costing at least $10 0 a day and we are asking for $15 now. What else did we do?

We said that you must be in the institution for a year before we accept that you won't be discharged and go back. If you do, then you start all over again when you come back. In other words, you want to make fairly sure that you are going to have to spend the rest of your life in an institution. Now we want, all of us, and certainly I want the best possible care for the people of Manitoba. With this money, we will be able to do something that we wouldn't be able to do this year. We will be able to move in the mental health field which for too long under all kinds of

Monday. 8 April, 1915 government has been lagging. All across Canada it is a new science to a certain point and there are lots of problems; it is not accepted by everybody, but we have to move in that direction. lt's going to be very costly and we are not getting any help from the Federal Government, our partner in this provision of services. Then we said it is not the revanue of your family.

We didn't want to see somebody 20, 30, mentally ill, a burden on the family where maybe the father was working, maybe the mother was working, but they had trouble making ends meet, then they would be stuck to pay bills for their child, their dependant. We said no, we are not going to do that. lt has to be revenue from you. Do you know how many people under 65 will have any revenue? lt would leave those that aren't covered by a third party; for instance, if they were injured in a car accident, then Autopac pays or there is a big settlement to help them take care of themselves.

Why shouldn't they have to pay a small percentage of their way? So that is what we said. In fact, the former health critic and th e former Mini ster during the Conservative years agreed with me on that. I know · what my friend is going to say, but we were wrong. Another thing I forgot to say is that they will be guaranteed to keep -those that have money -up to $15 0 approximate ly, the same as the people that are in personal care homes. What expenses do they have in a month? Most of the time they don't spend it.

You go to any personal care home and they'll tell you that it's an embarr assment for them because the money is accumulating and some of the children are coming with their hands out, they want that money. Now the public is paying to take care of their father and mother with the best possible care, very costly care, and they are going to get a pension besides that from the Federal Government. They are not going to pay; they are going to give that to somebody else. lt doesn't make sense. So I have no problem. That is why I didn't think it was that important to talk about the revenue.

The revenue is imp ortant. lt was an option in years like this year, but as far as I'm concerned, if they didn't pay anything, the principle is right and we've got to make a lot of decisions like that. lt's not going to be popular. In the next few years the role of the Minister of Health is not going to be popular because a lot of tough decisions are going to have to be made that the people won't like. Now we dealt also with chronic patients. The chronic patients are the same thing, the people that will be in the hospital for the rest of their lives, in some rehab hospital. lt's the same principle.

They would have to be in the hospital at least a month and the doctor would have to say there's not much point, that person cannot be rehabilitated. If someday there is a change, fine, you would have to start all over. Again, we judge the people on their own revenue, not on family revenue, or those that have responsibility for these dependants. Again, they have a guarantee, if they have any revenue at all, to keep up to $15 0.00. Of course, if they only have $50 revenue, you don't touch it at all but if they have $15 0 approximately -then they keep it. So I don't apologize for that at all.

I don't think it is going backwards, that it's changing things at all. Now, how else are you going to start getting a message across and how else are you going to talk to 669 the people if you don't say, look out, in 10 years, if you do nothing, that is what it's going to cost? You have a choice, and the people know that there is a responsibility to look at the moral issue. lt is one of the main concerns of the people in admin istration and the people providing services now, the issues that the people hav en't got the answers about yet.

Sur e, somebody can take advantage of that and say the Minister is saying that after a certain age you are not going to be able to have a heart transplant. First of all, at no time did I suggest that they couldn't, and I am talking about covering this with the taxpayers' money. I didn't give the answer and I made it quite clear that I didn't know the answer but I wanted to show the problem we had and eventually somebody will have to give these answers. I can elaborate on that. There are some areas where one patient cost us $300,000 a year. Can we keep on doing that?

That is what I said when we brought in this program. We said tha t we are provi di ng transportation but you are not necessarily going to get a Cad iliac or a Rolls-Royce; maybe you'll get a bicycle. That decision will be more important than ever now because of "Nhat it is going to cost if we do just what we are doing now, without all this advancement in technology and all these new methods and all these new drugs and all this CAT scan that we never heard of. A few years ago at least you didn't have that problem.

Now when you finish getting a few of these things and satisfying the hospitals that want them, they are practically obsolete and there's something new. Those are the problems. I'm not crying the blues; I'm just telling the people that this is something that we will have to face, and I am admitting that I haven't got the answers and I can't get the answers alone. A MEMBER: Excuses. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Oh, excuses. Well, there's the real clever fellow on the other side that calls it excuses.

You don't want to accept this, that is your privilege, but at least I am going to try to do something to try to give the best service possible. Those are tough decisions. My honourable friends are saying that you have your deficit, and then in the same breath are saying, what about my constituency; I need so many beds; I need so many of that and forget the guidelines, we need it. Those are some of the things that they'll have to look at. Now the question of chiropractors because my friend brought that up again, I think we are jumping all over the place, Mr.

Chairman, but you are allowing it and I hoped that that would surface sometime during the Estimates. I might as well answer it now. I am only answering the questions that I was asked or referring to the things that were mentioned before. The chiropractors, and I take full responsibility -if it's a sin, I sinned - I didn't know of any signed agreement at all. I took it for granted that we discussed with the chiropractors, the dentists, the optometrists, we have di scu ssed it many times dur ing th e fee negotiations. We have done that. The contract, by the way, was never signed between the government -you

Mondq I April, 1985 keep referring to the government -there is a difference. I never signed any document. Yes, it was signed by the Commission and the Commission could only discuss something that is within their power, not a political decision that is made somewhere else. Now the decision was very simple, and I think that's an anomaly. They are saying that they want to have full coverage.

Well, to start that, you start treating people like individuals, and to say that those that are punished by what we did are those that suffer the most is the most assinine statement I have ever seen because it doesn't look at ability to pay. If somebody is single, they had $10 2 of services. If they happen to be married, they can be the richest people and this single person could be the poorest guy in the world. This one that was married, his wife didn't go, well then, he can have 204, and I don't think that's right. I don't think that's right. If we're going to do something, we should make it more even.

This was a decision, and I won't hide the fact, we had different options to see if we could correct things that are wrong, save money in the process, improve the standards, and change the programs. That's the trouble with government, that we have a program and then there's no evaluation. You stay with it and then you have another program, and that's one of the reasons why we're faced with what we're faced today. We can't afford some of the things that we're doing. So, therefore, that decision was made.

Just as a question of courtesy, I asked the commission to get in touch with them and let them know what would be done. The president, who very conveniently doesn't say too much about that, the president was always somebody who I could get along with, very much of a gentleman, but he doesn't say that when he met with the commission that he said, well, some of the people might not like it, but we will not resist it. We will not fight it. We want to co-operate with the government, period. But I must talk to my executive.

So, there was at least 10 days or so around that time. until they had the meeting with the executive. The next day, the associated director of the commission got in touch with him and he said the same thing again, and that was it. Two or three days after, all hell broke loose. Now, I got a phone call that he wanted to meet with me within three days becau

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-4-21b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 4th hansardpdf 21b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	8396da1d43fb9d068cb082632ca80c3ea6137af1

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