Manitoba Hansard — 25 March 1982 (Sitting 21A, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-21a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEG ISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 25 March, 1982 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. D. James Walding (St. Vital): Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions ... Presenting Reports By Standing and Special Committees ... MINIS TERIAL STATEMENTS AND TAB LING OF REPO RTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. ROLAND PENNER (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table the Twelfth Annual Report of the Om budsman for the period Januar y 1s t, 19 81 to December 31 st. 19 81. It's presented to the Legislature pursuant to

Section 42 of The Om budsman Act. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. AL MACKLING (St. James): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a copy of the Spring Run-off Ou t look for Ma nitoba; it's a report by the Water Resour ces Branch of the department. Generally speaking, the report is favourable. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mu nici pal Affairs. HON. A.R. (Pete) ADAM (Ste. Rose): Mr . Speaker, I have a statement to make. In view of the recent media reports, I wish to assure the people of Ma nitoba that the government supports and has confidence in the credit union system.

There has been ongoing discus sion with the system with a view of enhancing the Manitoba locally owned and controlled credit unions and Caisses Populaires. We recognize that the system provides a valuable contribution to social and eco nomic well-being of Ma nitobans and it is to our inter est to significantly enhance the strength of the sys tem. Adequa te funds will be provided to support and strengthen the system and the government plans to announce the details of this suppo rt on April 1 st. 1982. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): Thank you, Mr.

Speaker. I thank the Minister for that announcement. I would just like to say that I'm pleased to see that the government is proceeding along the lines of the. I understand, recommenda tions of the report that was commissioned I believe some six months ago. I would like to say that this side of the House is also concerned about the credit union and Caisse Pop ulaire system.

It has served Ma nitoba well over the last many years and I know that with proper co-operation between governments, between members and between directors of the credit union 818 system, we will be able to solve the, I might add, few smaller problems that exist within the system right now. There's a lot of real healthy credit unions and I believe it's a time right now where some of the clean ing up has to be done and it's in that vein that we welcome the announcement here this morning. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of North ern Affairs. HON. JAY COWAN (Churchill): Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I wish to make a Ministerial Statement. I have copies. As the Minister responsible for Environmental Managem ent, I wish to inform the Legislature that I requested the Ma nitoba Clean Environment Commis sion to investigate and conduct public hearings into mosquito control programs in use in the province. I'm requesting such hearings as a result of concerns expressed last summer particularly over the use of the chemical Baygon.

As a result of those concerns, it is essential that a detailed investigation be carried out to determine the extent of the problem and develop appropr iate control strategies as needed. Therefore, I've asked the Clean Environment Commission to investigate the matter and to hold public hearings pursuant to

Section 13 (1 ) of The Clean Environment Act and to provide a report and recommendations before the next control season. The Commission's terms of reference include: (1 ) An assessment of existing and potential envir onmental problems associated with current control procedures and of alternative methods;

(2) A review of the efficiency of existing control methods and of alternative methods;

(3) A review of existing legislation and procedures with recommendations as to what changes in provin cial legislation may be required. I anticipate that this investigation in public form will give all interested individuals an oppor tunity to both provide their expertise and to express any concerns they may have. I especially want to encourage all those with such concerns to take this opportu nity to make their views known. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for Fort Ga rry. MR. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Thank you, Mr. S peaker.

On behalf of the Oppo sition, I welcome the announcement by the Minister with respect to an investigation into the subject at hand. As the Minister knows and members of the House know, we have a very keen interest and I personally have a very keen and experiential interest in this subject. I believe that the central issue must remain as much with the Minis ter of Health as with his colleague. the Minister of the Environment.

What is necessary is a successful search for a solution to a problem such as was posed last summer and constituted a major public health threat which so far has really defied solution except for the use of chemical insecticides. There was a few days ago, as you know, Sir, a two-day symposium at the Health Sciences Centre

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 which was sponsored in part by the Department of Health, a concept initiated by our government and pursued and maintained by the present government which sought to get at some of the very problems cited in the study that is proposed by the Minister. With that kind of intensive evaluation by all parties, I would hope that we can answer this question, but I would repeat that the Minister of Health and his offi cials must be very fundamentally involved in this whole question because there must be a better answer than the one that was used at the time.

The one that was used at the time was the only answer and it's very important that a search be funded and prop erly maintained to prevent damage from a public health challenge of the kind that we faced last year. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . . IN TRODUC TION OF BI LLS HON. VIC SCHROEDER (Rossmere) introduced Bill No. 18 ,

An Act to amend the Pari-Mu tuel Tax Act. (Recommended by the Lieutenant-Governor). IN TRODUC TION OF GU ESTS MR. SPEAKER: Before we reach Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the Galler y where we have 45 students of Grade 5 standing of the Ralph Maybank School. These stu dents are under the direction of Mrs. Mullan and the school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Fort Gar ry. There are 26 students of Grade 6 standing of the Margar et Park School. These students are under the direction of Mrs.

Jenkins, which school is in the con stituency of the Honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. On behalf of all of the Honourable Mem bers of the Assembly I would welcome you here today. Does the Honourable Member for Lakeside have a point of order? MR. HARRY ENNS (Lakeside): No, Oral Questions. ORAL QUES TI ONS MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. Mr . Speaker, as promised I would now like to table with the House certain documents that were forwarded to me by the officials from the State of North Dakota having to do with the Gar rison project.

My question to the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources would simply be, are these the docu ments or the proposa ls that had been discussed in the last little while here in Man itoba, and particularly the ones that he referred to in a press conference as having been announc ed by his Deputy Minister, Mr. Carter, at the annual meeting of the Action Committee Against Gar rison, March 6th? Mr. Speaker, I urge the Minister not necessarily to answer in haste and perhaps take these questions as notice. I don't particularly want him to hold another 819 press conference and leave us all wondering what it's about.

But the question is, are these the new Ameri can proposals that were discussed in this Chamber last week? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. MR. MACKLING: Not seeing the documentation that the honourable member is talking about, I wouldn't know. I'll look at it. MR. ENNS: Mr . Speaker, perhaps as a further sup plementary for the Minister to take as notice, the Min ister will recall that my colleague, the Member for Turtle Mountain, on several occasions asked whether or not the American position,

part icularly the Secre tary of the Interior, had in any way endorsed these new American proposals for Gar rison. Our External Affairs Minister, the Honourable Mark MacG uigan, was asked the same question in the House of Com mons yesterday. He indicated that while these had not received formal endorsation by American author ities as such, Canadians as such should not be taking them too seriously at that point. I simply add that to the Minister's information and ask him, upon studying these documents, whether or not these are indeed those recent proposals that have been alluded to? MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, the honour able member has furnished the House with the two docu ments. One appear s to be entitled Garrison Extension Special Repor t Preliminary Draft and it's the Bureau of Reclamation, Up per Missouri Regional Office, Jan uary 19 82, I have never seen that docu ment before, Mr. Speaker. I'll be very happ y to have a copy of it and look at it. I know that revisions to the Garrison project including what I would call changes in phas ing rather than revisions have been talked about for some time over the course of some years.

Also, the other document appears to be in the form of a news release outlining changes in funding of different aspects of the development, none of which amounts to any formal submission in writing as was asked in the original question by the honourable member. None of this indicates any formal documen tation having been submitted to my depar tment or to this government, Mr. Speaker. MR. ENNS: A final supplementary question. The second document refers to a construction

schedule proposed for the year 19 83 of some $7 million with a possible extension to $1 0 million of works to be undertaken of the Garrison project. The original question, Mr. Speaker and I'd ask the Honourable Minister to refer back to Hansard is whether or not there have been any new recent Amer ican proposals. I' m assured by American officials that these documents, these proposals are all public; that they were made available to Canadian and Manit oba officials,

part icularly at a February 25th meeting of this year. MR. MACKLING: Mr . Speaker, I think the record will show that the honourable member indicated that for-

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 ma! submissions were made to this government through my office. I indicated that I wasn't aware of any formal submissions made at all. The documents themselves indicate preliminary draft and there have been preliminary studies, there have been indications for some years that the proponents of Ga rrison are prepared to be flexible in respect to the phasing but they don't want to change the entire project in its entirety. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR.

BAN MAN: I direct the question to the Minister in charge of the Man itoba Telephone System and would ask him, in light of his statements yesterday that the government did instruct Manit oba Telephone System to install a satellite dish in Thompson, will this service be available to other communities? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services. HON. LEONARD S. EVANS (Brandon East): Mr.

Speaker, the appr oach that we have taken in the pro vision, or assisting in the provision of television sig nals throughout the Province of Man itoba that there be some general equ ivalency of bringing a service to the north and to the south and what's happen ing in the north is a move in that direction. My understanding from communities and I have spoken to different people; my understanding is that the cable operators in the south, including the Win nipeg cable operators are very pleased with what they have now, namely the so-called three plus one.

There is no move on the part of the Winnipeg oper ators to move in this direction. As a matter of fact, I under stand in the Town of Dau phin, they prefer to have three plus one, which they are not getting at the pres ent time. MR. BANMAN: A supplementary question to the same Minister. I wonder if the Mi nister could inform the House whether he will be supporting an applic a tion by Falcon Lake and Gimli to obtain the same type of television service that Thompson has. MR. EVANS: I'll have to look into that matter, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, the other day I think it was the Honourable Member for Tuxedo asked me a couple of questions. One was, how many applic ants had there been for mortgage rate relief, and to date the number is 1, 2 00. Forms have been received from the printer and are being mailed out, Mr. Speaker. Another question he asked was, what is allocated in the Budget for advertising of the Critical Home Repair Program and it was $53,000.00. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Tuxedo. MR. GARY FILM ON (Tuxedo): Mr .

Speaker, I wonder if the Minister means applic ants or inquiries since, to my knowledge, the applic ations weren't available; in fact, I think by virtue of a telephone call this morning, they were just about to be sent out. So does he mean inquiries rather than appl icants for assistance, firstly? Secondly, I just wonder when he rises to respond, would he also give me the answer to the second part of that question on the advertising, as to who was the advertising agency who had been appoi nted to do this program for MHRC . MR. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, perhaps I used the word "appl icants," they were probably appl icants then; they are not appl icants I suppose until an appli cation is comp leted, but they are people who believe that they qualify. I suppose after the department has asked them a few questions, they think that they will probably be appli cants; anyway, there were 1, 200 people that fall into that category. They are request ing forms and they are being sent out. In respect to the advertising again, Mr. Speaker, I'm advised that the advertising agency is the Credo group. MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, could the Minister indi cate if that is the same group who partici pated in the New Democratic Party's advertising campaign during the past provincial election? MR. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I'm not familiar with the contractual arrangements in respect to the elec tion adver tising, but if that is the same group, I'd be highly pleased, because they did a very good job for the New Democratic Party. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Hono urable Mem ber for Tuxedo. 820 MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, could the Minister indi cate if this group was commissioned or appoi nted based on a proposal call basis or if other agencies were invited to put forward proposals for this particu lar campaign? MR. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I'm given to under stand that Foster Advertising probably were not appr oached. There was a very short time frame in which this had to be carried out because we were committed to moving quickly and therefore this item was app roved without going to Foster or any of the other former agencies that the previous administra tion employed. MR. FILMON: Mr .

Speaker, I wish that the Minister had moved as quickly with respect to getting the applic ations prepared as he did with respect to appointing his friends to do the advertising campaign. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Pembina. MR. DONALD ORCHARD (Pembina): Thank you, Mr . Speaker. My question is for the Minister responsi ble for the Man itoba Telephone System. Could the Minister confirm that Westman Media Co-op, their licence to deliver cable television is now being

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 reviewed for renewal? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services. MR. EVANS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I believe there is to be a hearing shortly. MR. ORCHARD: A supplementary, Mr . Speaker. Will the Minister be intervening in support of Westman Media Co-op's licence renewal appl ication to assure that residents in Dauphin and other areas of rural Man itoba will not have their present service interrupted? MR. EVANS: Mr .

Speaker, although we have some questions to ask of the service provided by the West man Media Co-op we will be supporting in a general way, by means of formal intervention, before the CRTC. MR. ORCHARD: Just a clar ification, I missed the last part. Did I understand the Minister to say that the department the Minister will be intervening for mally in support of that applic ation? MR. EVANS: Yes. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Gar ry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr .

Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister of Community Services and I would ask him whether in view of the serious charges made against the Winnipeg Children's Aid Society by a director just resigned, in view of the recommenda tions made by Dr. Charles Ferguson at the Children's Hospital a few weeks ago, and in view of the recent discussions in the Estimates of his own department, Sir, whether he now will undertake to launch a review of the child welfare system in the province? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, a great part of the problem, as the honourable member is aware, is now being add ressed; that is the qu estion of adoptions, the placement of children for adoptions in whatever jurisdiction. So that area is being reviewed. With regard to the one specific matter raised by Dr. Ferguson, as I indicated to the member I think a week or two ago, I believe the inquest report, the decision of the inquest hearing has not yet been handed down, at which tfme we would like to review the recommenda tion of the inquest body and see where we go from there. MR. SHERMAN: Mr .

Speaker, just for clarification, when I refer to the charges made against the society, I'm not necessarily referring to the charges having to do with "misuse of funds." That's another subject entirely. I'm referring to the char ges having to do with tokenism in terms of community input with respect to the formulation of CAS policies in the child welfare field. It 's that area, Sir, that I'm concerned about and I 821 would ask whether he is considering broadening the examination that is under way with respect to Native adoptions to encompass that whole area of policy in the child welfare system? MR. EVANS: Mr .

Speaker, that is something that per haps should be looked into at some point. I would like to remind the honourable member that the director ship of the CAS Winnipeg is more or less the same directorship that existed for many years when he was Minister responsible for this area. So there's really no change to my knowledge in the composition of the Board of Directors of the CAS. It 's made up of well meaning very dedicated people; people who are dedi cated to the care and development of children in the Province of Manitoba.

So, I would think if the honourable member has some specific concerns that he wishes to raise that we'd be glad to hear them. Certainly the allegations made today and some of the suggestions as reported in today's newspaper will ae looked into. MR. SHERMAN: A final supplementary, Mr . Speaker. Where does the task force under Judge Kimelman stand? Is it at work? MR.

EVANS: Material is being prepar ed for that par ticular committee and we are in the process of con tacting formally now, we have informally contacted various organizations, and today there should be a formal request go out to the specific organizations with regard to the make-up of the committee. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kirk field Park. MRS. GERRIE HAMMOND (Kirkfield Park): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Telephone System. Can the Minister inform the House what the Manit oba Tel ephone System operating surplus was last year? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services. MR. EVANS: Mr . Speaker, I believe that type of information is made available in the Annual Report of the MTS. MRS. HAMMOND: To the same Minister, Mr. Speaker. Could the Minister confirm that the surplus is appr ox imately $1 4 million? MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I can't confirm that or deny it. I'll have to go back and look at the report. MRS. HAMMOND: To the same Minister, Mr . Speaker. Could the Minister inform this House why this gov ernment is allowing the MTS to request a 16 percent rate increase? MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, the information I have is that with the given rate structure that is now in exist ence and given the fact that inflation is still with us, and given the fact that the opera ting costs of the system are rising rapidly, that unless it did receive

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 some type of rate increase there would be a serious deficit in the next year. So, this information, of course, will be brought out and fully discussed before the Public Util ities Board, of course at which time members of the public will have ample oppor tunity to make representation as well. I might also remind the honourable member who is new to this House that she will have oppor tunity at the Public Util ities Committee of the Legislature to ques tion officials, particularly the Chairman of the MTS. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. JAMES E. DOWNEY (Arthur): Mr.

Speaker, a question to the Min ister of Agriculture through you, Sir. Does the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Speaker, support his colleague, the Minister of Energy, in his intentions to remove the Hydro rate freeze? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of Agriculture. HON. BILL URUSKI (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, whether I support or not support, the decision has not been made first of all and it's a policy decision. An announcement of a review is not a decision, Mr . Speaker. MR. DOWNEY: Mr .

Speaker, it appears more and more every day that the Minister of Agriculture has very little input into the policies of the government across the way. Could the Minister do an impact study or have his department do a calculation of the benefits of a Hydro rate freeze that has been in place over the last few years and make sure, Mr. Speaker, that the removal of the Hydro rate freeze would not have a severe impact on the farm community? MR. URUSKI: Mr . Speaker, I'm sure that any factors that will be used in dete rmining what the future course of action may be will be taken into account. MR. DOWNEY: Mr .

Speaker, is the Minister going to do a study or an assessment of the removal of the Hydro rate freeze for the farm community in the Prov ince of Man itoba? MR. URUSKI: Mr . Speaker, first of all, there's been no decision and on the second part, no. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Swan River. MR. D. M. (Doug) GOURLAY (Swan River): Thank you. Mr . Speaker. I'd like to direct a question to the Premier of the province.

In view of the Premier's elec tion promises of a new tomorrow for the North, I'm wondering what he or his government is doing about the 400 people that were laid off their jobs some three months ago in Leaf Rapids and Lynn Lake. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. HOWARD PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr . Speaker. it's very, very interesting. I have checked some of the quotes by the honourable members across the way 822 and it's interesting to note how some of the qu otes have been taken quite out of context, but that be as it is.

In response to the Honourable Mem ber for Swan River, this government has never for a moment sug gested it could turn back the waves insofar as world metal prices. What has happened in connection with northern communities in Man itoba is the same that's been happening in northern communities in other parts of Canada, indeed the entire world, Mr. Speaker, in which there has been a substantial decrease insofar as employment in the mining sector. At least, Mr.

Speaker, insofar as this government is concerned, the Minister of Northern Affairs and others have jour neyed to those communities and spoken to those that have been affected to ascertain indeed what the situa tion is and that indeed was done some time ago, in case the Honourable Member for Swan River did not observe. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for St. Norbert. MR. G. W. J. (Gerry) MERCIER (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of High ways and Transportation. I gave him notice on Mon day of this week. I wonder if he could indicate, Mr .

Speaker, what action if any his depar tment is taking with respect to the use of three-wheel mobility aids by physically handicapped persons. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Gov ernment Services. HON. SAMUEL USKIW (Lac Du Bonnet): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I did take the question as notice the other day from the honourable member and I have not yet received the information, but as soon as I have it I will convey it to the House. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question to the Minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board.

In view of the Ombu dsman's Report which we have just received, Mr . Speaker, and particularly the comments of the Ombudsman on Page 5 in which the Ombudsman indicates that, in his opin ion, it was a mistake for this government to can cel the public inquiry to be held by Mr . Justice Nitik man. In view of the fact that it would have been in public and the public would have been made aware of the truth, Mr . Speaker, could the Minister explain why he cancelled the public inquiry by Mr . Justice Nitik man and instead embarked upon a series of private meetings? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of North ern Affairs. MR. COWAN: As was explained at the time of that decision, Mr . Speaker, the government decided that it was necessary to resolve this matter as quickly as possible. It was our feeling at the time that as long as a major inquiry was ongoing that we could not bring forward significant changes to The Workers Com pensation Act in isolation and that we would have to wait for that inquiry to have comp leted a very long

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 process in order to bring forth those changes. We also had in our possession the Lampe Report which made some specific recommendations, some of which the previous government had acted upon, some of which it did not have time to act upon, and we wanted to continue that process. We felt that the course of action which we chose would allow us to bring forth those changes as qu ickly as possible and we hope to do so in the near future.

I can assure the member who is req uesting the information and through him, the Ombudsman, that we will be providing a statement in respect to the report which we have received as soon as that state ment has been put together and we've had an opp or tunity to review what are several hundred pages of observations and summaries on the part of the person who undertook the review for us. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that the Ombudsman is of the opinion, as a result of his twelve years of experience in investigating claims with the Workers Compensation Board, he rejects the suggestion that Board employees are taught to look for ways to reject claims rather than improve them, and in view of the fact that there was a public inquiry undertaken by our government, we now have a private inquiry, would the Minister undertake to file the report which he has received with the members of the Legis lature immediately? MR.

COWAN: The review which was undertaken by a person who was associated with the inquiry previous to our assuming office was done so under assurances from that individual and myself that information given to him would be confidential. We have received that review.

What we would like to do at this time is to discuss it some more with the individual who con ducted the review and put it in a form which can flow through us, which will in fact protect the confidential ity which it was felt was necessary for those individu als giving very specific information to the person undertaking the review, and at the same time provide the member opposite and the general public with an overview of the observations and summaries which are included in that report. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker. could the Minister con firm that in view of the fact that senior board members have been publicly maligned by virtue of the accusa tions that have been made and they would have been exonerated during a public hearing, can he confirm that he will be exonerating them from the charges that have been made? MR. COWAN: I can confirm to the member that I will be provid ing him with an accurate report based on the observations and the summaries of the person who had undergone that review on behalf of the govern ment and at that time I would be more than happy to discuss with him the specific details.

Previous to that, I believe it would be inappr opriate, however, I do want the member oppo site to know that we will be provid ing him with what we believe and what I am certain the author of the original report believes will be an accu rate reflection of his work. 823 MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ou ra ble Mem ber for Minnedosa. MR. DAVID R. (Dave) BLAKE (Minnedosa): Mr . Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs.

I wonder if he could inform the House how many applica tions have been received in his office for assistance under the Main Street Mani toba Program that was announced so often by him and his Leader during the election campaign. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member of Munici pal Affairs. MR. ADAM: Mr . Speaker, there have been many enquiries to the Manitoba Main Street Program.

There have not been any applications as yet, because the program is in its formulative stages and as soon as the program is in place and ready to be appl ied to the different communites, an announcement will be made and the local governments will be advised how to proceed to apply under that program. I can't give him the exact figure of how many enquir ies have been made, but I understand there have been a number of them made. MR. BLAKE: To the same Minister, Mr. Speaker.

I wonder if he could give us some idea when the appl i cations will be ready, and if he could give us some idea of the guidelines that may be used in those that may want to put in a formal application? MR. ADAM: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all we have to go through the Estimates before we can get the authority to be able to implement the progra m, and my Estimates will be coming up sometime during this Session, hop efully anyway, sooner or later, but whenever my Estimates are appr oved, then the pro gram will be ready to go. MR. BLAKE: Yes, Mr .

Speaker, if he's receiv ing enq uiries, and I know he is receiving some, the pro gram was announced with great flourish and great promise and $1 .5 million was earmarked some many, many months ago for this particular progra m. If they are going to continue to go around raising the expec tations of people in rural Manit oba, Mr. Speaker, I think they deserve a little more than some information that the forms will be ready some time in the future, we'll discuss it in our Estimates. They would like to know now.

Spring is coming they want to start doing the work and they want to know what they're going to be able to do. MR. ADAM: Mr. Speaker, the program, I expect, is a very exciting one, it has been well received by members of the community out there, small busi nessmen and local governments, small towns, big towns. They're very excited about this program and, Mr. Speaker, we're going to proceed with this pro gram in the first year in office, not like the previous administration that were going to do it perhaps in the fourth or fifth year. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour abl e Mem ber for Rhineland.

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 MR. ARNOLD BROWN (Rhineland): Thank you. My question is to the First Minister. Can the First Minister say whether the government has cha nged its decision to charge the towns along the Red River, namely Mor ris, Ste. Jean, Letellier and Emerson for flood control? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, this matter, as the Hon ourable Memb er for Rhineland knows, rests within the responsibility of the Minister responsible for Nat ural Resources, and our Minister of Natural Resour ces has already met with municipal people and has received their submissions.

I understand, Mr . Speaker, he is presently considering the submissions that have been made. MR. BROWN: My question is to the same Minister. Does the First Mi nister think that the decision was a fair decision when the City of Winnipeg received all the costs of flooding paid for by the province, flooding from the Red and the Assiniboine River? MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, it really does not matter at this point whether the deci sion that was made by the former Premier Duff Roblin during his term in government was a fair or unfair decision or whether it was wise or unwise.

If the hon ourable member wants to debate that the Premier Roblin made a ill-founded decision back in the mid- 60's, then I'm quite interested in hearing his argu ments, Mr . Speaker, but what the Mi nister of Natur al Resources is doing at this point, is weighing the sub missions in the responsible way that indeed a respon sible government should do, and I assume, Mr . Speaker, will be also entering into discussions with the Federal Govern ment, which are also responsible for some reduction insofar as their payment towards the communities that are affected. MR.

BROWN: My question is, has this been dis cussed at Cabinet as of the last couple of months? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Emerson. MR. ALBERT DRIEDGER (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't take a chance in asking the First Minister a question. I'll direct my question to the Minister of Finance. Is it true that the Minister of Finance is not supporting the Beef Assistance Program proposed by the Minister of Agriculture? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, I could assure the Member for Emerson that I will supp ort any program that gets through our Cabinet as soon as it gets through. MR. DRIEDGER: Mr. Speaker, further to the Minister of Agricu lture then. In view of the First Min ister's promise of putting top priority on the Beef Income Assurance Program, could the Minister indicate why he is not announcing the much needed and much delayed program to assist the beef operators who are 824 in dire financial straits. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of Agriculture. MR. URUSKI: Mr.

Speaker, as soon as the program will be announced, I'm sure the members opp osite will know. At least, Mr. Speaker, the program that we're working on will not be like the Hog Assistance Program that was developed by their former adminis tration where they didn't even foresee that they were going to be short of money before the Legislative Session ended, and Mr. Speaker, we ended up having to provide supplementary funds which we are voting in now for errors and omissions that were made by the Minister of Agriculture and his Minister of Finance. MR. DRIEDGER: Mr.

Speaker, to the same Minister, acco rding to the radio announcements, the Minister indicated that he would be consulting with various producer groups prior to making an announcement some time in the future. As we have been waiti ng for months already, could the Minister indicate which producer groups he's going to be meeting with before he makes a decision on this program? MR. URUSKI: Mr . Speaker, with as many groups as I possibly can. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of North ern Affairs. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The other day, the Member for Kirkfield Park asked me a question respecting the status of the appeal against the discharge of treated effluent from the Warren Sewage Lagoon to Sturgeon Creek. I'd prom ised her a reply at that time when I had further infor mation. It is my understanding that the Clean Envi ronment Commission held a public hearing in Warren, on February 16, 19 81 , on this issue. On April 10 , 19 81 , they issued Order No. 914 , which did allow for the discharge of effluent to the Sturgeon Creek drain. That order was appealed by an individual and by the City of Winnipeg.

The previous Minister of Environ ment dealt with that appeal at that time and asked that a meeting be convened with the Environmental Man agement Division, Agro Water Services of the Department of Agriculture, and representatives of the Rural Municipality of Wood lands in order to deter mine whether there were appropria te mechanisms which could be used to prevent that discharge, and to come up with some studies. Those studies are ongo ing. At that time the appeal was deferred. The appeal is still deferred until those studies are present.

I can assure the member that it is my understanding that the lagoon has been constructed and is receiving some liquid waste. However, I'm informed that the lagoon will not require discharging for at least three years. So there will be no discharge into the Sturgeon Creek, and we expect a study within a year's time, at which time we will deal with the appeal. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Portage la Prairie.

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 MR. LLOYD HYDE (Portage la Prairie): Thank you, Mr . Speaker. I have a question to the Minister of Community Services. In view of the fact that the Mi n ister received a letter from the Mayor of Portage la Prairie, dated November 17 th, can the Minister advise the House and the -(I nterjection)- I beg your par don, correction, Mr. Speaker, Mar ch 17 th, I beg your pardon . Mr . Speaker, can the Minister advise this House and the citizens of Portage la Prairie if the government supports a construction of a multi purpose recreational centre at Portage la Prairie? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services and Corrections. MR. EVANS: Mr . Speaker, again, this question or a similar one has been asked of me in the past and I've given answers. We've discussed it also during the Estimates. Some of those people who are saying answer it, were not present during the Estimates. I might add, Mr. Speaker, the Mayor has had one dele gation in to see me since I've become Minister of this department and indeed I had the pleasure of talking to him informally when he was visiting this building dur ing the official opening of this Legislature.

I said to him at that time and I say to the honourable member now, as I said before, the entire matter is under review. MR. HYDE: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. A further ques tion to the same Minister. Is the Minister and the Premier of the province planning further meetings with Mayor Greenslade and council, to provide full details of the recreational centre for the citizens of Portage la Prairie. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I hope to have an oppor tu nity to be at Portage la Prairie on a number of occa sions. I'm always willing to meet with the various councils and mayors of our good municipalities in Ma nitoba.

I think my first answer really provides the answer for his second question. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr . Speaker, the former Minister of Natu ral Resources, the former Mem ber for lnkster, is tak ing one of my municipalities to the Supreme Cour t challenging the certain planning actions that the municipality has been taking to prevent the building in flood-prone plains. For a long time now the reeve and the council has been attempting to arrange a meeting with the Minister of Municipal Affairs. They have been unsuccessful in doing so.

May I petition the Minister to allow Reeve Fleury of the Rural Municipal ity of St. Francois Xavier to meet with the Minister and indicate whether or not this government is prepa red to stand behind provincial planning legislation that is germane in this instance. I have some respect for the talents of the former Member for lnkster in pleading cases before the Supreme Court. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Munici pal Affairs. MR. ADAM: Mr.

Speaker, I'd advise the Honourable 825 Member for Lakeside that I have met with the council and I have announced, immediately after assuming office, that I would have an open-door policy and I would meet every council, as many as I possibly could, and whenever they wanted to meet with me my door is still open. I've met with the council, we have had a nice discussion with them and we are keeping on top of the situation that they are involved in. We have to be very careful, Mr. Speaker, if the case is before the courts, it's subjudice and we will be keep ing right on top of that situation, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please. The Ho nourable Member for Turtle Mountain on a point of order. MR. A. BRIAN RANSOM (Turtle Mountain): Yes, Mr. Speaker. In vie w of the fact that the House has now been meeting for a month, I wonder if the Govern ment House Leader could indicate to the House when some of the Standing Committees might be expected to meet. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Govern ment House Leader. MR. PENNER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I hope to be making an announcement on that tommorow. MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Question has expired. ORD ERS OF THE DAY ADJOURNED DEB ATES ON SECOND REA DING MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Gov ernment House Leader. MR. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, would you please call the adjourned debate on Bill No. 14 , The Interim Ap pro priation Act, 19 82? Bill NO. 14 - THE IN TERIM APPROPRI ATION ACT, 1982 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm not speaking on this bill at this time, I'm deferring to the Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, I want to take advantage of the debate on Interim Supply to express my consternation, my dismay and my growing concern about the announcement that was made yesterday as a result of questioning in this Chamber by the Mi nister of Energy and Mines about the possibility of the lifting of the Hydro freeze. Mr. Speaker, my concern really centres on these following facts. First of all, I have a very real appr ecia tion of the dilemma that the government is facing, and

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 more worrisome to me, and should be to all Man ito bans is that we have experienced what an NOP admin istration does when faced with that kind of a question. We have seen it reflected on our Hydro rates during the mid-term years of the 19 70s. Mr . Speaker, I appr e ciate, as I said, the dilemma that the government has in this instance. You see, Mr. Speaker, it's another one of their promises. It 's another one of their promises that they made about immediate resumption of the construction of Limestone, the Limestone generating pla nt. Mr.

Speaker, they have made many promises but we certainly recognize, on this side of the House, that that is a particular promise of major significance to Manitoba. We are all the more concerned therefore, Mr. Speaker, that promise be entered into with some caution. Mr. Speaker, nobody has to tell anybody on this side of the House about the importance of Hydro developme nt, Hydro construction to the Man itoba economy as a whole. The fact that even in 19 70 dol lars, put some $250 to $300 million per annum into the Man itoba economy escapes no one and its spin-off effects to the entire economy of Manitoba. So, Mr .

Speaker, what worries me is that this government appears to be at least at this stage fumbling the ball on some of the major requisites to get Limestone going whether it is pursuing the Alcan arrangement to a satisfactory conclusion, the Western Gr id, the West ern Inter-Tie or even resuming discussions with Southern neighbours about the Man dan Inter-Tie, carr ying on heavier, stronger negotiations with neighbouring provinces, Onta rio, the point being that we need long-term firm sales, firm commitments for power before you can insert that word "orderly" into the development of Hydro. Mr.

Speaker, we have seen just too much disorderly development of Hydro, building for building sake, as attractive as that is in terms of immediate easing of the pressures on the Manitoba economy. But, Mr. Speaker, every householder, every ratepayer has for those that save their receipts, those annual rises in that basic utility, Hydro, in their records -1 4, 18 , 22 percent, 20 percent - in total, some 15 0-16 0 percent increase in Hydro rates with a very short span of years. Mr.

Speaker, I don't pretend to know all my figures, but I'm told that Hydro rates for decades during the '30s, the '40s and '50s, the '60s remained relatively con stant. In fact, with the demand and expansion of cer tain Hydro facilities in the mid'-60s, I seem to recollect there was even a downward revision at one particular period of time, but in any event, Man itobans did not face - that was one area of the cost of doing the business. the cost of living, the cost of shelter that remained fairly constant in Man itoba. That was prior to the advent of an NOP administration taking office in this province. Mr.

Speaker, what worries me most about the announcement that the Honourable Minister of Energy and Mi nes made is that -y ou know, I've worked with them too long, I suppose, with these fellows opp osite. You do get to know their method of operations. I sense, Mr. Speaker, a distinct and deliberate tactic and move on the part of the honourable members opposite. The Minister of Energy and Mi nes is a senior member of that admin istration. In my judgment, that was a studied reply.

It was a deliberate first step in the 826 softening up of the Man itoba public to the inevitable Hydro rate increases that are unavoidable if they are to get themselves off the horns of the other dilemma in terms of doing something to generate the economy in this provi nee. And, Mr. Speaker, Limestone is, I recognize, one of the fastest immediate areas that the government can turn to. The plans for the resumption of construction at Limestone are there. It doesn't take a great deal of lead time to develop and to get into a 2,000, 3,000 man workforce at Limestone.

After all, it was that adminis tration that had to call a halt to the construction of Limestone in late '77 and that is well known. But, Mr. Speaker, I do caution the government. I really caution the government. We've done, I think only correctly so, we've reminded the honourable members opposite of the many promises that they made to garner votes in the last election and we will continue to do so, and we will continue to remind them of this one that they've made but, Mr.

Speaker, the record will show that we have not been pressing them to move on this, their most major promise, without putting at first a few things in order in the first instance. We have not stood up in this Cham ber and called for the immediate resumption of Limestone construction, even though we know what that means to this province, but what we were doing and what we knew from the day we took office in '77, the importance of that construction and ergo the diligence with which we pursued the kind of long-term power commitments, Hydro com mitments that would make that possible. Mr.

Speaker, honourable members opp osite have shown anything but an appr eciation of the fact in their discussions with Alcan, in their discussions with IMCE , in their discussions with the Western Inter-Tie, and you can't separate those major projects from the major project that they would now like to proceed with, namely Hydro Development. I hope they can, Mr. Speaker. They have demonstrated in the past that they're quite prepar ed to do so, but Mr. Speaker, I hope that Manitobans will recognize at what cost. At today's cost, Mr.

Speaker, the carrying cost, the dollar cost of ser vicing the money required to build the Limestone Hydro generating plant, simply the carry ing costs are about equal to the total amount of cur rent Hydr o reve nue. -(I nterje ction)- No, Mr . Speaker, I' m not against it. I' m for putting the Alcan talks on the front burner. I'm for agreeing to getting the agreements necessary for the Western Inter-Tie.

Any one of those two will enable a responsible and orderly and, yes, a proper technical decision to be made that will secure at firm rates with escalator clauses built into it, long-term 35, 40, 50, 60 year sales of power that would enable this government to pro ceed to get Limestone on track, but I don't see them doing it, Mr. Speaker. Instead, to the utter amazement of all, they treat billion-dol lar developments like Alcan very lightly in their responses in this House. They get upset about the method of advertising used.

They like to play little games about talking - well, we're not just talking to Alcan - we'll talk to Kaiser, we'll talk to Reynolds. I don't know what those particular tota lly American owned multinationals have that the Canadian-owned multinational of Alcan has. Furthermore, I know because the record is not that dim from the time that I

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 was in government, that while certainly other firms were contacted, the fact of the matter is, it was the Board of Directors of Alcan that were serious about coming to Manitoba that are right now carrying on and expending upwards to $5 million, $6 million in feasibility studies to come to Manitoba and it is this government that has certainly turned that on to mod erate or even low heat in terms as far as priority with the things that they have on their plate. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I want to come back to my major point; the only trouble with that is if they do that you can't turn on Limestone. Mr. Speaker, I should retract that. Yes, they can turn on Limestone and for those that weren't in the House that read what must have been to some extent the boring debates, the long tedious debates on Hydro and Hydro development througho ut the decade of the '70s, it was never a question so much of what was being done by the honourable members oppo site when they were last in administration, but it was the timing, the sequence of the building they were undertaking.

The fact that they had to go and borrow massive amounts of money at great cost even during the '70s to finance them and then let the chickens come home to roost on our Hydro bills. Mr. Speaker, resumption of Limestone construc tion without firm sales means a doubling of Hydro bills within two or three years for every Manitoban. Let that add on to all your costs that we are facing along with the municipal costs that we are now facing. That 15 0-percent increase that we phased during the short four or five years in the last NOP administration need not have been. Need not have been, Mr. Speaker.

We are still paying for it. We are paying it by the Minister of Finance patting himself on the back about saying how he can turn over $40-million Swiss franc loans in Switzerland to $60 million. We haven't paid anything off yet; it's just cost us an extra $20 million. That's how we're paying for those kind of utility increases because of the disorderly construction schedule, disorderly in terms of the sequence of how these kinds of plants have to be built. Mr. Speaker, I want to make it very clear to the government that we are, first of all, armed with the track record in this instance.

Some of us, and there were lonely voices in the wilderness, one was a former Premier of this province, Mr. D.L. Campb ell, then a Director of Manitoba Hydro, he felt that strongly about it. He resigned on a matter of principle because he foresaw what was going to happen in the '70s to Hydro rates. There were others, senior management people within Hydro like Mr. Kris Kristjanson, who also accurately predicted what was going to happen to that utility if that kind of disorderly construction

schedule were to be pursued in the '70s and of course, my former colleague for Riel, Don Craik, myself, oth ers, my current leader, spoke out and spoke out ad nauseum at that time about the perils we were entering. Mr. Speaker, I ad mit it was a broken record. Nobody was listening. It was something that had been said all before. The only difference, Mr. Speaker, second time around is - as I say, we now have a track record.

We can predict with accuracy by how much a decision to proceed with Limestone construction at this point is going to cost the average resident, the average 827 farmer, industrial user, municipal and school user of Hydro. We simply have to go on the record. We know the immediate end result. So, Mr. Speaker, rather than get hung up with the kind of, I suppose, other election promises that they made to themselves that they weren't going to pro ceed with some of the mega projects or certainly that they didn't figure high on their priority of things, they now find themselves in that position.

The one mega project that they would like to proceed with, and by the way the one that has a lot of appeal to a lot of Manitobans, we faced that constantly during the four years we were in office. Why aren't you starting up construction on Limestone? We had most serious presentations made to us by the construction indus try who missed and who needed and we knew that - we acknowledged those $300 million, $350 million a year that was being injected into the economy. But, Mr. Speaker, we also knew having experienced the mid'-70s what that would have done to Hydro rates and a decision had to be made.

We made the right decision by doing two things. The Honourable Minister of Mines and Energy Resources talks about taking politics out of these kinds of decisions, Mr . Speaker, I suggest to you that politics is always front, right and centre in many of these decisions. I know this administration doesn't operate that way.

The Minister of Natu ral Resources makes fundamental decisions affecting five or six val ley communities that impact on their taxes, that break with tradition as to the funding for flood protection and has to stand up in the House and acknowledge that he wasn't really aware of it, that obviously a senior bureaucrat had made that decision for him in his department. Mr. Speaker, let it be put right on the record there was no attempt to cover up the fact that indeed it was a political decision. It was brought into this Cham ber, a bill was passed.

My former colleague, the Minister of Energy and Mines, we started the program; we froze Hydro rates for five years. Mr. Speaker, let me remind the members oppo site they'll have to bring it back into this House to unfreeze them. Mr . Speaker, had we done simply that, I would have been prepared, that would have been bordering on the irresponsible to simply impose a political decision on a utility with respect to rates and then just leave it at that knowing the problems the utility faced. Concur rent with that, indeed, Mr .

Speaker, to the point that the Minister involved asked to be relieved of some of his departmental responsibilities that he then had in the Department of Finance to devote full-time to the finding, to the creating, to the security for us of a long-term commitments for the surplus power that we then had, that we then inherited from the overbuilding of the previous administration and that we knew we would need if we were to consider at all the resump tion of construction on the Nelson. So, those two went hand in hand, Mr . Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, it's left to the area of question I suppose right now as to what would happ en, but it's fair for me to speculate that were we in office at this particular time or were we in office now, we would have concluded at least one of those major agreements, certainly the Western Inter-Tie, perhaps one of the first ones could have been concluded by now. On that basis, a responsible decision to proceed

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 with the much needed development work on the Nel son could have and would have been made, Mr. Speaker. At this mom ent, it would infuse into all manners of businesses within the length and breadth of this province, some hope, some enthusiasm for looking at 19 82 with a bit more hope, with a bit more confidence than they have at the present time. Mr.

Speaker, I paint that picture for you, Sir, only because I want to put it on the record that I read in the Minister of Energy and Mines' ready what struck me was his eagerness to seize upon the opportunity to respond to a question in this House for what I read to be, and I think will prove to be, a very major, one of the first major decisions that this admin istration will be taking. But knowing the consequences because I will not insult his intelligence, he knows what the conse quences of that decision will be. So in typical PR fashion, they have to soften up the general public for that.

They have to start talking about offering options to the people of the Man itoba - what is it that you want? Two things, do you want a heightened level of economic activity or you can you stand some increases in your Hydro rates. That's a pretty good argument to make right now, or the other argument is - that's the scare tactic that they have been using - do you want moderate increases in Hydro rates now or do you want to really get hit with massive increases when the five-year freeze comes to an end? Well, Mr. Speaker, let me assure you there need not be any massive increases.

I'm not suggesting that there will not ever be increases, moderate increases to acknowledge the inflationary trends of the day will obviously have to be passed through, but the kind of cost that we are talking about, Sir, are not predicated by inflation; they're pred icated by wrong decisions. They're predi cated by putting $300 million, $400 mil lion, $500 million into place when it didn't have to be put into place. That's why we're paying for Hydro at the rate we're paying today.

If they want to, for other reasons, get themselves off the dilemma, to keep a promise that Limestone would be started immediately - of course, that promise has already been broken. It isn't immediate any more. It is now five months into this government's administra tion but, Mr. Speaker, I don't want to press them too hard on that. As much as I and every construction worker, indeed, every citizen of Man itoba would like to see us get on with the development of the Nelson River. But, Mr.

Speaker, as I said before, we have a track record to refer to; we have our own utility bills to refer to; and the people of Manitoba know what an NO P administration can do to Hydro rates. The only trou ble is. Mr. Speaker. if it comes this time around, it will impact even more severely. You have government agencies promoting with tax dollars the transfer from oil to other alternative heats. There is no question there, there's a lot of installation of electric furnaces going on in this province. Mr.

Speaker, that made a little bit of sense, pretty good sense, as long as you had a Conservative ad ministration around that had ·some concern about Hydro rates. That made pretty good sense. But, Mr. Speaker, you'll find themselves walking into a situation where you have the senior govern- 828 ment handing out $800 to homeowners to convert from oil to electric or other uses, while the Provincial Gov ernment is slowly softening up the public to sub stantial and massive Hydro rate increases because they have found no other way of stimulating the economy. Mr.

Speaker, I advise them, let's stop worry ing about whether or not they agree with every Alcan ad. In fact, I'd recommend them to use it every once in a while when they're putting away leftovers in their fridges. It's really quite a handy wrap, and don't be prejudiced against that firm, even if you don't like aluminum. Even if you don't like aluminum, but it will help you get started with Limestone.

If that's not your first priority, then at least get to the point that we were at where we had all three Ministe rial agreement on the Western Inter-Tie, ready to go to the three provinces -(Int erject ion)- yes, we sure as heck had - and move on that front. Move on that front and then we can have orderly Hydro develop ment in this province. Mr. Speaker, I even suggest to you, resume discussions with the Mandan people about selling power to the southern interest because, Mr. Speaker, what has to be done is firm commitments for power have to be in hand before resumption of construction can take place. Mr.

Speaker, with that in hand, responsible techni cians - the kind of decisions that the Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines wants to see being taken - they can make responsible decisions even looking at short interim deficit positions if need be for Manitoba Hydro but knowing that they've got 35, 40, 50-year firm sales for power with proper escalator clauses built into the contracts, a utility can then come back to their customers and say, we can bear out this high-cost period.

We don't have to burden with unacceptable rate increases; we can can make sure that Manitoba will continue to be able to count on that particular cost item in our living cost index as remaining reasonably stable. Mr . Speaker, I want to be particularly cautious about this government. I will watch with care their appr oach in how they move in this particular area, as will others. Mr. Speaker, the record is simply too clear and the amounts of money that we are talking about are too massive. We are talking, you know, a $2-billion project to resume Limestone, what was a billion dol lars in the '70s.

At today's costs and with this govern ment's pension for borrowing it offshore, it could place Man itobans and the utility in tremendous jeo pardy. Mr. Speaker, I caution the government that they respond to that particular promise with a great deal of care. We will press vigorously for the res umption of Limestone construction in an orderly way. Mr . Sp eaker. that means you have some idea of what your going to do with the end product that $2 billion of taxpayers' money produces. You have some idea of where that's going to go and at what price and for how long and, Mr .

Speaker, without that, we are obviously going back to the mid-Seventies when the easiest solution was just build, keep the concrete pouring and keep the construction workers going up north. It helps to generate the economy here in Winnipeg and the rest of the province; keep everybody working with no heed to the eventual consequences. Mr . Speaker, it's going to be different in the 19 80s

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 and I wanted to put that on the record. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. CLAYTON MANNESS (Morris): Thank you, Mr . Speaker, I rise also to debate on the Interim Supply. I'd like to relate some articles to begin with on the front page of a rural newspaper that came into my hands today and then I'd like to relate that to the larger scene of the Provincial Government in the manage ment of the economy.

This rural paper is dated March 24 , 19 82, and the first item deals with a car dealership in receivership, and it says, "Carman's General Motors dealership, Parkway Motors, has been put into receivership by the Toronto Dominion Bank. The dealership was shut down Monday night; the staff retained through until Friday to complete the stock taking. The dealership has had financial problems for several months as have so many other car dealerships across the cou ntry. Carrying a staff of more than 20 employees last Janu ary, the staff has been trimmed down to 13 at the time of the closure.

Negotiations for sale of the dealership had continued during the past week; however, the sale was not completed and the bank foreclosed." One other item of bad news on the front page of this particular paper - it talks about, "Man corn Co-op Ltd. of Carman was forced to sell its corn-handling plant to a private company this week or face bank ruptcy, corn growers learned at a meeting with Mani toba directors last week in Carman. Financial Man ager Shawn McCut cheon explained at the meeting last week that the bank has cut off the operating loan and won't lend Mancorn any more money.

At this point we're not in a bankrupt position, but we're get ting very close to it. The co-oper ative's major losses were made in the early stages and steps have been taken to ensure that such losses as occurred last summer don't happ en again, but because enough money couldn't raised over the last few days to save the co-operative, the plant will be sold." Just two items on the front of a paper, and I guess when the co-ops start to feel that pressure, again we have to ask ourselves how many other co-ope ratives are faced with these same problems.

What about the unreported concerns, the concerns that don't hit the front page of papers here in this small town and in other places? What about the fact that the Bank of Montreal I heard this morning - reported that net farm income in 19 82 would drop by some 15 percent and that there was no hope at all for farm profits in the next two or three years? In a nonagricultural sense, how many union workers and nonunion people, for that matter, are concerned about their future? Events of the past few days, Metro Drugs, and how many others are going to find them selves in that situation in the near future?

People tell me that high-cost transportation and those manufacturers that depend on high degrees of energy, non-Hydro and type, and with the poor eco nomic activity that's encompassing us all over the last while and no doubt will continue, I'm sure manufac turers will feel increasing pressure to move also. The workers know this and the problem is, of course, unions and workers can force compa nies, owners and employers to do many many things, but no way yet 829 has a union found a way that they could force a com pany to make a profit.

Job stability and personal debt, these are all unre ported concerns as compani es attempt to reduce their workers, but there are other concerns and prob lems, too, on the front page of this paper and they are of a different concern. They are not concerned too much at all with economic activity and I'd like to quote two of the examples of that. One is headlined, "Teacher Cutbacks Op posed. This particular division board has not yet made a decision on teaching reductions for the coming term following a meeting last week at which three delegations presented objections to the proposed reductions.

The delegations were objecting to a propo sal for teacher cutbacks made at the board's meeting on March 1 st. A vote was taken on the proposal and was tied; the motion was defeated. The vote was then taken to refer the matter back to Public Relations and Policy Committee for further study but that vote, too, was defeated." One other

article - this again is noneconomic in sense in the facial part of it, but naturally everything has economic consequence, and here are residents complaining about emissions from a plant. "Foremost Sailcraft Ltd. will change its exhaust system in the plant to exhaust fumes out of the north side of the building. Their hearing was heard and the hearing was held following complaints to the Commission by three residents who live on the south side.

They said the odor from the plant was their biggest concern; that it makes it difficult to spend time outdoors during the summer." So these are the other concerns: two strictly eco nomic; two noneconomic on the face. Reading just from page 1 of this particular rural paper , this one rural paper, and you know how many we have in this province - we have many.

I haven't bothered to go into detail into papers like the Winnipeg Free Press and attempted to catalogue all their reports of com panies in business, but just reading this one page on this one paper today, I realize that just as many resi dents of this area in question are not understanding how the closing of two businesses in their own back yard forces them in times to readjust their thinking. Just like groups within the same community don't understand, I have the feeling that this government does not as yet fully understand the times in which we are in; at least, if they are, they are not demonstrating it.

Now, using the previous examples as an introduc tion, I'd like to be more specific. What my concern is that they are related to financial management of this province by the present government. As a new member, I must indicate to you, Mr . Speaker, that I was overwhelmed and I am overwhelmed by the gov ernment requirement of 2.78 billion and who knows where it will end, maybe it will end up closer to 2.9 billion. Anyway, some $3,0 00 a person - I guess to put it into proper perspective, my family of six, that represents an outlay on my behalf by this government of $1 8,000.00.

Yet, in a detailed review as we go through Estimates, I'm sure myself and my colleagues will hard pressed to find any wanton waste or redundancy. But I also realize, and if I can refer to a prospectus supplement put out by the Province of Manitoba

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 dated December 23rd I will use this extensively for the next little while - I refer to page 6 of this particular document where we have a table on the value of pro duction. I notice that the total value of prod uction for this province measured in 19 80 dollars was some $12 billion. $12 billion -t hat represents of course $1 2,000 for each individual. Further, reading down it, it breaks it out into certain areas: primary agriculture contrib utes some 14 percent; minerals, 7; manufacturing, 35; construction, 11; electric power, 4; retail trade, 26; and tourism, 4.

Those are the contributors to our provincial wealth in a year-to-year sense. Yet in 19 82, I'm also cognizant of the fact that we have Metro Drugs who are bankrupt; we have co-ops that are feeling difficulties. I've heard mentions made today of Leaf Rapids and some of the problems there and I also know that my primary industry of which I'm most concerned, primarily agriculture, that net income will fall some 15 percent in that area too. Yet, what do I see? I see a government that's increasing spending and I don't know what the rates are.

I've heard 14 .8 ; I've heard 16 .8; I've heard 18 .9; I don't know what the final numbers will end up, but what I see is no indication whatsoever of a drop in spending to meet the obvious drop in the creation of wealth. You know, we can make reference to the Fed eral Government transfers and the drop of such and I don't know what they are, whether they're $63 million or $10 0 million or $1 60 million, but through it all you always have to ask yourself, from where is the addi tional revenue to come?

Going to page 13 , again in the prospectus issued by this province when they went forward for that additional 200 million in loans and when we realize that 40 percent of our revenue is sourced from the Federal Govern ment by way of transfer, some 27 percent from income and corpor ate taxes, 13 percent sales tax and 4, 6 and 3 and 6 from gasoline, luxury taxes, natural resources respectively, you begin to really wonder how we're going to man age the $2.9 billion of spending. Again, the question, from where or what sources is the additional revenue to come and I think the answer is pretty straightforward.

We know where it's going to come; it's going to be borrowed. It's going to obviously come from some savers in some other ju risdication and I suppose the Budget will give us some idea on the particular deficit and what it may be. My guess, certainly not educated at all and I hope I'm wrong and if I am wrong I'll gladly apologize. but my guess is a $600 million to $800 million deficit. What's the debt now? Well, page 22 of this same document tells us that the provincial debt is some $4. 76 billion or $4,600 per person. What about the cost of servicing that debt?

The Federal Go vernment, just a month ago or three weeks ago, if all of us were listening when they made the announcement; I think it was certainly highlighted one night on TV, indicated that 23 percent of the federal spending was going to be directed towards servicing the federal debt; Ma nitoba's share, I'm not absolutely sure. I'd like to use an analogy if I could to try and paint the picture the way I see this particular problem developing in Ma nitoba and the way it has occurred over the last 30, 40 years and where we are right now.

If you could use the analogy of a dishrag that you 830 pull out of a sink full of water and if you could imagine that the hands that you use to wring that dishrag are the government's and the water that drips from that dishrag is the provincial or the national wealth. I think then the chronological events over the last forty years that I'm about to give to you might give us a better pict ure of what's really hap pening through all governments. Of course, the '50 were good years; we know that; there was a lot of pent-up post-war demand.

People had served their nation and they were wanting to go back into the world -(Int erjection)- we'll get into that another time, the Member for Arthur - and we knew that they wanted to raise families and the years were good and all the government had to do with that wet, dripping dish rag was just gently touch it and the water flowed and the proceeds flowed. Then the '60s same along and they twisted a little harder and of course the water still flowed. Then the '70s came along and the water didn't flow quite as easily.

As a matter of fact. we had to twist pretty hard, but we got water and we as a nation prospered and we did many things. But now we're in the '80s and we've got that dishrag; we've got it squeezed as tightly as you can and there's nothing coming from it. There's the odd drop and that's where we are right now. I'm going to come back to this so I hope you can keep it in mind. At this point, I'd like to break into some basic philo sophy if I could and the First Minister- (lnterjection) l'm afraid my colleagues may be disappointed so I hope they're knocking the table afterwards.

The First Minister. from time to time, and I've heard him use this statement a number of times through the campaign and certainly since and he says, "There's a time to balance the Budget and there's a time to run a deficit." An interesting statement, "time to run a deficit" and a "time to run a balance" and then we go back to the decade of the '70s and we wonder after we've seen how we balanced no Budgets in that decade, we have to ask the question, how long will it take the western world to recover from that decade?

We've seen what's happ ened in the '70s; inflation. and as indicated the other day we know our school costs are three-and-a-half times what they were in 19 71 ; productivity growth, in a real sense, positive through the decade of the '70s but not imp ressive; politics, what was happening in the decade of the '70s? Politicia ns were afraid to say no, and there was no reason to say no to every cause and every social reform and every wish and every want. Why?

Because the squeeze could generate enough wealth and peo ple, the society as a whole, what part did they have to play in taking us through the '70s and giving us this false psychology that we're all under? I know in the area of food production

whereas individuals spent some 24 percent on food, they now spend 18 percent and they're still not happy, still feel it's way too much. The consumer that wants it all now and pay later and, of course, as politicians we're nothing more than a reflection of society as a whole and that caused our decisions of the '70s. The '70s were good years, but did anybody make an attempt to balance the budget in those years? Well, I think the Manitoba P.C. Government tried. They tried, I know they tried and I remember the complaints.

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 restraint and the criticisms that came down on that government. I didn't say that they were successful, I said they tried and they tried hard. They tried, but through it all whatever they did, I never ever did once hear anybody, maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear once anybody say that there was waste in those years. I've never heard the NOP say that, never heard it, so they tried to do the best they could. Then, we listen with great delight - I happ en to find copies of the Saskatchewan Estimates in their Budget Speec h, trying to see how they were attempting to balance the Budget.

What was the rationale behind Saskatchewan attempting to balance the Budget? Were they thinking that the times were that bad that this was the time? If you've got wealth, why do you worry about deficit? If you have got wealth and it's resource wealth and it's going to keep flowing in, why worry? For some reason, Saskatchewan's worried. They must be. So you see that or is it just that's an election year. But, usually in election years, you don't worry about balancing the budget. So there we were, Saskatchewan.

Then you look at the Saskatchewan Budget and you realize that their expendi tures are 2. 78 billion, 10 0 million less than our Estimates. Again the question, why the richer province with virtually the same pop ulation as ours, why again are they able to balance the Budget and expenditures per person? I guess one big reason is, of course, the cost of interest, provincial debt, that's one of many reasons no doubt. So I ask myself, would an NOP Government in Manitoba, would it ever attempt to balance the Budget? I don't think ever, ever, ever, ever.

Eight years out of twelve they've been gove rnment in this province and were they all bad years? Were they all bad years? I am lead to believe by the members opposite there were some good economic years, but did we balance the Budget in any of those eight years? Never. The First Minister has said many, many times, that when times are good, the Bud get should be balanced, so that when times are bad you can go into deficit. Okay, times are bad now and they're becoming worse. Where are the savings to come from that we need so desperately right now? Well, there are no savings. Why?

Well, I think the reason there are no savings is because that Keynesian appr oach, the priming the pump , the throwing the dollars at every proble m, that theory has outlived its life, it's finished. The theory that brought us out of the Depression in the late '30s and the theory that motivated our econ omy in the late '40s, post-war, and did a good job and I commend it for it, does not have the answers today. We need a new theory. People realize it, but does our government realize it? All I see is again attempts to throw dollars at problems, prime the pump.

I've heard the criticism constantly from members oppo site about Reagano mics, terrible. It's the scourge of the Western World as we know it and I would like to, if I could, Mr . Speaker, I'd like to read a few quotes. The slurs I've heard towards that attempt at least, I question if they're anything more than pure rhetoric, or if in fact this government and governments like it still believe that solution comes from government and government only. I'd like to refer to this particular magazine and as members I know we all received it, The Institute for Research on Public Policy.

It's the March/Apr il addi- 831 tion. I would like to go directly to page six, The Eco nomics of Gradual Im provement, and I'll just take some quotes from it and the

article is "What Went Wrong in the '70s and What Can We do About it for the 19 80's." I'm sure that members oppo site have read it, I know they wouldn't pass good reading like this over and particularly when it makes such strong reference to the problems we have and as legislators I know we would all want to read this.

One of the quotes says and I quote, and it is talking about our problems, "The answer clearly lies in the psychology of a deep entrenched inflation, the only real way out is to attack the psychology." It says further that, "Or thodox theory today readily accepts that careful monetary restraint including limiting the growth and the money supply is an essential element in the contr ol of winding down of inflation and the restraint programs being followed in the United King dom on the one hand, and the apparent melange of helter-skelter monetary tightness, gyrations in fiscal policy and supply side initiatives all rolled into Rea ganomics in the United States on the other hand, are cited as evidence of this criticism of the monetarist approach.

"Our own experiment in Canada has been similarly assailed as a failed experiment because a steady and significant deceleration over the past six years and the growth rate of the money supply narrowly defined as currency in circulation and demand depo sits, appears to have had relatively limited impact in res training inflation." One much shorter quote, "The government must seem to be willing to bear its share of the burden and some kind of Reaganist budget slashing." One other ar ticle in that same magazine, page 42, and it's called, The Poverty of Reaganism.

If I could quote again, "It must be pa rticularly disturbing to Keynesian policy makers, those advocates of dollars by government for solutions to all problems," like we have across the way. "It must be particularly disturb ing to Keynesian policy makers that the countries where the influence was greatest are those which have suffered most. In a changing world, a particular economic model has only a limited life span because its simplifications become dangerously wrong and the evidence is overwhelming, that the precise simpli fications of Keynes' models of 19 36 are now obsolete.

Keynesian policy is regarded as analogous to alcohol." I'll stop there with that one, so government has helped social problems tremendously, it has over the past years. We understand that, but in the 19 80's can the government continue to spend in an uncontrolla ble manner when that dish rag, the one that is squeezed so tightly, has run dry. So, again I ask, will an NOP government in Mani toba ever, ever balance the Budget? I answer no, because I believe in the old outdated methods of solu tions because this government believes in the old outdated solutions.

And what are their solutions, what are they putting before us, or I'm sure they will in time - Ma nOil. That's the solution; that's a solution? Street front repair, that's the solution; that's going to help. The joint venture psychology, that'll help. Spend, spend, spend. It's just not the time and we know that. What about the other approach? The other appr oach that they chastise and they cast aspersions over. The

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 Reaganomics appr oach, or call it any thousand things as I'm read to believe. But that's what I think this government calls it. Will it work? -(ln terjectio n) well, I don't know if it is or not. I do know that inflation last month in the United States was between four and five percent. I do know that the major unions down there led by the auto industry are taking as much as $2 an hour cuts because they're happ y to maintain their work. We know that the profits that the companies were enjoying there have been slashed to a point where they are all negative. Is it working? I don't know.

But all they're trying to do is break that inflation psychology. You can't criticize them or chastise any body for attempting to do that and I wonder at times if this government or governments that feel that infla tion is no problem, I wonder at times if they really really care about inflation at all, or if they would sub scribe with why it has to be beaten. I pulled a little

article out the other day of a farm paper and I quote, Frederick Schultz, former Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governor s, puts it this way, "I don't think there's any question that the end result of inflation is loss of freedom and a change in the political system because inflation makes the government take over more and more. Inflation causes a breakdown in the free market or drives it underground. And why does it go under ground? To escape taxation." If I could again quote one other article, and it comes from the Winnipeg Sun dated March 22 and of course the main individual that's being quoted in this particu lar

article is Milton Friedman and, of course, I'm sure the members opp osite will not accept too many of his espousals. But I'd like to quote two or three, and he's talking about the US situation, he says, "the easiest way out for Congress is to raise taxes." I'm sure which is going to occur here. "The easiest way is to increase taxes, but the right way out for Congress is to cut spending." And I see no indication of that. What Pres ident Reagan has achieved has been to put Congress in the position where it's going to have to face up to that hard choice.

And he predicts the great economic progress in the decade ahead if the government pursues a steady dependab le policy. That includes less regulation, lower government spending and lower marginal tax rates. They are all the wide-open issues, the ones that those that espouse free enterprise stand for and are so foreign, and so obviously distasteful to the members present because they believe, they hon estly, sincerely believe that the government has the solutions and that more dollars in every case will find the ultimate.

Another point, I wonder if the ND P, pardon me, the party in power indicate a tremendous concern in infla tion and I think it's been said by them and by every body that interest rates are the problem. We need a made-in-Canada interest rate policy.

And, of course, anytime that our side has shown any moral supp ort, not open verbally, but any moral support to the attempts by Ottawa to wrestle this monster to the ground, we've been severely criticized. -(I nterjec tion)- I won't, because I'd like to quote something that you also have or we as members have in total, we have this, "Can we have made-in-Canada interest rates?" and again, this was prepared and written by the Institute for Research on public policy. But I know 832 all the members opposite have read it and I'm sure that every one of them has thrown it into File 13 .

But I think to sum up the intent, or the major thrust, that this one person's attitude towards a made-in Canada interest rate, is that it's suicide. That is has no place; that it can't work. So, I'd like to conclude now, Mr. Speaker, if I could and I'd like to state that I believe this government, firstly, has no understanding of fiscal management, that they feel an increase in spending of 14 , 16 or 18 percent, whatever it ultimately ends up to be is neces sary. And like all the pump primers of the past they believe that is the solution.

I believe this government yet does not yet understand that when I hold up the front page of this paper, I don't think they really understand that this is just one paper and that this is happening everywhere in this province - happ ening everywhere. And I wonder if they realize that dish rag is dry and that what it needs more than anything is a relaxation from that furious grip, just to let it relax and let it unfold and let it breathe and let it drop down to where it can build up again.

If they will just allow it to regenerate, it'll come back and it will be full of suste nance and it'll be full of wealth and again, all they've got to do is gently touch it. All the social progress that'll come from that will even make them happ y but they have to give it a chance. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourab le Mem ber for Roblin-Russell. MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin-Russell): Mr .

Speaker, I would like to address a few remarks to the motion that is now before the House in an effort to try and find out from this government where they intend to go and how they're going to get there and how they're going to live up to all these promises and pledges that they made to the people in my consti tuency during the past election campaign. Mr . Speaker, it's a very interesting world, what a differ ence a day can make.

When you read through the rhetoric and the promises that this First Minister made around this province last Novem ber, and then pick up and read some of his stuff that he's saying now, like this release in Brandon the other day, it's not the same world, Mr. Speaker. It's n'ot the same man, he's cer tainly not talking the same language. He's backtrack ing like a scared rabbit. I would like today to raise the matter of the Manco Plants that's closed at Rossburn and at Pilot Mound. I would also like to find out what the dairy industry of these communities are going to do. Is there any future for them?

I would like to find out, and try at least, Mr. Speaker, what we've got for the beef industry. Have they got nothing to offer at all for the beef industry in our province? I'm going to raise a subject mattert hat was brought to my attention today, the community of Winnipego sis, very dear to my heart. Two businesses closed up in Winnipegosis. Likely about 40 people out of work. Mr. Speaker, I'm also going to try and see if I can't find some solutions to the people at Roblin where we find Roblin Forest Products are shut down almost to four or five working. Mr .

Speaker, I just wonder when you read through all this rhetoric and these piles of junk

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 and half-truths, qu arter-truths, ill-truths, and every thing else that was spread out across this province during the election campaign, and for me as an elected person to go back and try and explain to these people what's going on in this place, what kind of a government they have in this province today, and who is running the province, and who's going to provide the leadership. Mr. Speaker, it's scary, I can assure you, it's scary. First of all I'm most concerned that we don't have any farmers over in that caucus.

I don't see anybody that's considered, in my opinio n, to be an active farmer today that can give that government any leadership. I, secondly, have some problems of finding some body over there that has any business background. Anybody that has operated a successful business in this, oh yes, my apologies, I see the Honourable Member for St. Boniface, I withdraw that. But anyway there are very very few. I just wonder, Mr. Speaker, when they sit around the Cabinet Table where they get their guidance on mat ters such as the problems of the cheese industry and Rossburn and Pilot Mound.

Who in that Treasury Bench is leading the fight for the people of Rossburn and Pilot Mound. I guess there's nobody, because I questioned the Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs yesterday at some length. He gave me no answers at all. I wonder, is there a committee at all functioning to try and get the cheese industry func tioning at Rossburn and Pilot Mound, Mr . Speaker? Is there a subcommittee looking at that matter?

Is there anybody across there that's seriously concerned about the problems and those people that are laid off today at Rossburn and in Pilot Mou nd, some 25 or 30 of them don't have a job, they have no job and wonder what this government is going to do for them. Or are they, in fact, going to do anything? Mr . Speaker, if I don't get some answers within the next week I have to go back and tell those people out there that this government does not have the answer for the problems that they face. And they don't have the solutions to the problems out there and they're not going to do anything about it.

That scares me. That scares me, because when I go back and read the promises, the pledges, this is stuff that's in black and white that the First Minister and other candidates went around this province and pledged, signed, the First Minister's signature's on these documents. When, Mr . Speaker, are they going to come back to reality again and review what they have said? I wonder, has anybody over there gone back through their old election material. I'm sure the Member for Elmwood likely has, because he didn't get into the Treasury Bench.

But nevertheless, is there anybody over there that's gone back and taken a look at the editorial page of the Free Press, on November 9th. Just read that for the good of your health sometime and see what all these great things that Mr. Pawley was going to do for the province. Well it says here "ND P's Howard Pawley's thumping the province at a promise-a-day clip." A promise a day, he was. Yes, and they're all listed. It goes on here and it says - (I nterjection)- all this activity by Mr.

Pawley is com mendable, it says, "but it would be even more com mendable if the proposed programs made some 833 sense." That was the second big quote out of the Free Press of that day. The other one says "Many of Mr. Pawley's other proposals however are as strange as they are imp ractical." That's the one that haunts me about the people at Rossburn and Pilot Mound. That those kind of prom ises and pledges are strange and impractical, that he made at that time, and he's not going to live up to them. He hasn't shown us any evidence to date he's going to live up to them. No, he hasn't.

I just asked him what they're going to do about the people in Winnipe gosis, if you read the latest issue of the Dauphin Herald. -(I nterjection)- Yes, I know alot of people in Winnipegosis. Marchenski Lumber has gone into receivership in Winnipegosis. Do I hear the Member for Dauphin doing anything about that one? Or the Mem ber for Ste. Rose, or the First Minister of this province? Mr .

Speaker, the Winnipegosis Box and Mill Work at Winnipegosis have closed their doors putting 20 to 25 people for the summer months out of business, and in the winter months they said there another dozen logging to keep the plant ope rating. About 35 people are out of work at Winnipeg osis today as we stand here. Do I hear anything coming from the Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs to help those people out? Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely nothing coming out of this government because I suggest when they were stumping this province in the election campaign they didn't mean a word they said.

It was just junk, absolute junk. They have no intentions of living up to those election promises and they don't have anybody over there with the courage to stand up and say how they're going to do it. That concerns me, Mr. Speaker. It concerns me especially because when I read now out of the editorial that came out on Mar ch 18 th, at Brandon. This is the First Minister - "I 'll deliver later." Now that's not what he said on November 18 th. These things were going to be laid out on the first day.

They were going to be there and all the people of this province would go to bed happy at night, they'd have dollars in their pockets, they'd all be working, read it. What's he saying now? "I 'll deliver later." I am asking the First Minister who is in this Chamber today, when's he going to deliver it, how later? Six months, two years, four years, or is he never going to deliver these things that he plans, is he never?

I sus pect it's the latter because surely with the fresh new Treasury Bench that he's got there they should be able to come up with some of the answers to the questions that I'm raising on behalf of my people. But today, Mr. Speaker, nothing, just blank stares from across there. They'll stand up and they'll wind all around the question, Mr. Speaker, look you square in the eye and say I can't promise your people anything, because we don't have the answers. And now the First Minister, the man that's leading this party says ''I'll deliver late r." Isn't that shocking? That is shocking, Mr.

Speaker , it must shock you being a new member in this place, it must shock you. You must be shivering in your Chair there, to see that you have a First Minis ter leading you who made you all those promises and now he comes out and says "I 'll deliver later." I'm sure you must be concerned, like the rest of the members in this House, Mr. Speaker, as to where, and when, and why, and how, he can't stand up and justify

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 what happ ened. The only solution that I have left is to rise in my place on an occasion such as this and try and see if I can't motivate this bunch across the way to live up to some of these pledges and promises they made to the people out in my constituency. And how much longer I'm going to be able to have enough strength and courage to do it, I doubt that I can answer that at the moment, but surely, surely there should be somebody over there to tell the people at Rossburn and at Pilot Mound - are you going to help Manco open those plants or aren't you?

And I want just an answer yes or no. Maybe the Mem ber for Springfield can answer that because he answers a lot of questions around here. What can the Mem ber for Springfield take if he'll give me back to the dairy producers at Rossburn and Pilot Mound who are bringing their milk into the factory and the factory is closed, Mr. Speaker. I guess they're asked to take their milk to Saskatchewan. Now isn't that progressive? The government's only been in office five months and we already have farmers who are delivering their milk to Saskatchewan. That's an insult.

That's an insult to the dairy producers in this province; it's an insult to agriculture in this province; it's an insult to the Minister of Agriculture in this pro vince; it's an insult to this government. Absolutely, there's no other way you can look at it. Why shouldn't you react? Why shouldn't you? Why can't the Member for Springfield rise in his place and give me some answers? I'm not getting them from all the others in there, Mr. Speaker. I'm sure he will, when I sit down, I'm sure he'll give us a lot of information -(I nterjection)- Mr.

Speaker, certainly when I sit down, I'll gladly accept it then but I have a couple more questions I'd like to raise for the honourable member and when he does arise in his place, he'll have more than one question. Maybe the Mem ber for Springfield can assist me to tell the beef producers in this province, where is all this glory and this goal and these great policies and this great thinking and philosophy of the Socialists who said, "Leave it to us, we'll look after the beef industry in this province. We'll help you solve your proble ms. We'll get you out of your econo mic dilemma," Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the Mem ber for Springfield's got an answer for that one when his Minister doesn't have it and his First Minister doesn't have it, so I'm sure he doesn't have it. I wonder what they can tell the people of Winnipe gosis? What can they tell the people of Winnipegosis - the Mayor of Winnipegosis who is pleading here in the Dauph in Herald for help, pleading for guidance, pleading for this First Minister when the members ... MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER, Jerry T. Storie (Flin Flon): Order please. Or der please.

I just have a report that the recorder is having trouble recording the honour able member's speec h because of the noise in the Chamber, so could I ask members to keep their com ments a little quieter? MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, maybe that microphone isn't working. Should I move over this way? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The honourable member 834 has 25 minutes left. MR. McKENZIE: Mr .

Speaker, I would again - I'm appe aling now on behalf of the Mayor of Winnipego sis and the people and the council in the Winnipego sis Village and the surrounding areas to see if the First Minister can't help them to solve the problems of Mar chenski Lumber, and he says here that it's gone into receivership. I guess Metro Dr ugs is -(l nter jection)- well, he could be laughing. But anyway that plant has closed at Winnipegosis. It's something sim ilar to what happ ened to Metro Dr ugs. And the First Minister is here in the room and I'm sure he's listening. And then of course the other one, Mr.

Speaker, that comes up here is that Winnipegosis Box and Millwork and that business has been operating in Winnipegosis for many, many years. So there's no way, Mr. Speaker, that it's a management problem. They certainly knew how to manage their industry. There is some other problem there. It's the marketplace, and I'm sure the First Minister and his Treasury Bench there have some markets for that product. I don't think they care, but I wonder if they have any markets. Have they any encouragement to offer to that box factory in Win nipegosis?

Well, the Minister of Natur al Resources, maybe he could get a bunch of boxes constructed at Winnipeg osis, but I don't have much hope for it, Mr. Speaker, as I stand here this afternoon. The other one, of course, that I'm concerned about is the whole general slowdown in the economy in the province since this government has taken over. It's scary. Mr. Speaker, it's scary to read the newspapers all across - not the country but the city papers - to see the terrible things that happen to our people in this province with this government sitting here on their thumbs or on their hands.

Standing up, the First Minister says, "I'll deliver later" and what help is that for the people at Metro Dr ugs, some 350 that were walking the streets today looking for work? What help is that to the people in Winnipegosis? ''I'll deliver later," he says. I'll deliver how much later? Six months? Six years? Never.

I suspect it's the latter because unless I see a different attitude from this First Minister, unless I see a differ ent attitude from this government, unless I see some different initiatives and different programs coming out of it, they don't have the answers for these busi ness problems that we're facing today. I suppose the First Minister maybe hasn't got the courage of the First Minister of Canada who said he was going to wrestle inflation to the ground, but nevertheless, this Minister is the one that made the promises.

The First Minister of Canada when he stumped this country in those days didn't promise hardly anything. In fact, I don't think he promised anything except he smiled and wore a flower in his lapel, but this Minister -t he record is here, there's all kinds of it, there's reams of stuff. Mr. Speaker, let's read this one - he says here this is an important message that he's sending out to the people of Manitoba, and it says here, "Bankrup t cies have skyrocketed." If he feels that bankruptcies skyrocketed when we were in government, how would you describe it today? How would you describe it today?

Huge bankruptcies, numerous more bank ruptcies - bankruptcies like we've never seen in this

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 province are taking place today, and the First Minister sits over there with his back to me and reading some thing and not listening at all. I know. He says, "I 'll not deliver now. I'll deliver later," and that's the reason why I can't get his attention, Mr . Speaker. He went on, Mr. Speaker, in some of these docu ments and he said, "Plant closures have meant the loss of thousands of jobs." Now isn't that a big state ment? "Plant closures have meant the loss of thou sands of jobs." Yes, Sir, there's his picture.

The impor tant message - there it is - and I ask him to again today rise in his place when I sit down, tell us what he's going to do to help the people in Metro Drugs. Tell me what you're going to do with the plants at Rossburn and Pilot Mound, those 25-30 people walk ing around out of work. What are you going to do with the people at Winnipegosis and they're out of work. No hope, no guidance, no leadership, no programs - all they get is a notice in the Brandon Sun - "I 'll deliver later." Mr . Speaker, I wonder if the First Minister of this province has a conscience.

I wonder if he actually has any concern at all for these people that are walking around this province out of work today? He came out with another big election shot here "Conservatives will give anything to be re-elected." Now isn't that a joke? But he goes on here and he says, a precious resource. Great words, great wisdom by this First Minister "when plant closures and bankruptcies were forcing thousands of people out of work and out of this province, the Conservatives did nothing." I am asking this First Minister, Mr. Speaker, and I'm look ing him square in the eye, what's he going to do?

What's he going to do about Metro Drugs? What's he going to do about the plant at Rossburn and Pilot Mound? What you going to do about Winnipegosis? He just laughs and grins. He has no heart; he has no concern; he doesn't even know what I'm talking about, Mr . Speaker, because he's not going to deliver. He says, "I 'll deliver it later." Mr . Speaker, I'm sure there's a lot of unhappy people in this province today trying to figure out where this government's going to take them. Where is the lead ership that we see in all these new pictures he's got He looks like I don't know who in this one here.

His hair is all muffled up, new hair style, and one I never saw before, but look at that, that important message and that went right across this province, Mr. Speaker. Those people are certainly depressed today. They're sitting back wondering what the heck is going on in this province and where are the saviours of the world that they put in office here who said they were going to solve all these problems. They are going to tell the people of Rossburn today, I'll do something later. Tell the people at Pilot Mound, I'll do something later.

Tell the dairy industry, one of the most economic bases that we have in my constituency, tell them that we'll do something later. When? We're not going to do any thing now or I'll deliver it later. That's not good enough, Mr .

Speaker, and I don't think the people are going to accept it much longer because they certainly don't deserve the treatment they're getting from this government because they're the ones that made the promises; they're the ones that made the pledges; they're the ones that put it in black and white and told the people of this province what 835 they were going to do and now, the First Minister goes in an interview in Brandon with the Vancouver Sun and says, I'll deliver later. Mr.

Speaker, I'm going to be on my feet on many occasions in this Session because I'm not going to accept that I'll deliver later policy which we're now getting from this lame duck government acr oss the way. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. If no other member wishes to speak to Bill No. 14 , it will stand in the name of the Honourable Member for Fort Garry. The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. DOWNEY: Could I have it stand in my name? MR. SPEAKER: The bill will stand in the name of the Honourable Member for Fort Garry. The Honourable Govern ment House Leader.

SECOND RE ADING - GOVERNMENT BILLS Bill NO. 10 -T HE RE CIPR OCAL EN FORCEMENT OF MAINTENANCE ORDE RS ACT MR. PENNER presented Bill No. 10 , The Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Or ders Act for second reading. MOTION presented. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-Gen eral. MR. PENNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill No. 10 is a draft Act intended to repeal and replace the existing Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Or ders Act and hereafter I'll refer to it as REMO. The existing legislation was enacted in 19 61 as a result of the then Uniform Law Commissioners of Canada.

At the same time, similar legislation was enacted by other provin ces. Now, since 19 61 , there have been no substa ntial amendments to this legislation. After review of the existing legislation, the Uniform Law Conference of Canada, a conference in which Manitoba is fully represented, drafted a new uniform Act in 19 79 and that was revised in 19 81. Bill No. 10 substantially adopts The Uniform Act with one major exception that I'll amplify in a moment. Alberta has passed the legislation adopting The Uni form act, but this legislation has not yet been pro claimed.

The Uniform Act has been introduced in Ontar io and the other provinces have been studying the legislation with a view to enacting it.

The purpose of the existing legislation is to provide a mechanism whereby an order for maintenance for a depe ndant made in one province will be registered and enforced in another and, as members of the House will know, this is extremely important where we have, as we do have a highly mobile society, so that you have Enforcement Or ders or Maintenance Or ders made in one province and one or the other of the spouses may leave that province and the question of enforcement may arise at some subsequent date.

Where there is no order in existence, the legislation also provides a mechanism allowing a dependant to obtain an Or der of Maintenance against the party

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 living in another province as long as that province is what is called a reciprocating province. The purpose of the proposed bill is to continue to provide the same rights and remedies available under the existing legislation, but it is intended to clarify and strengthen the procedures which are used.

The pro posed bill substantially adopts the recommendation of the Uniform Law Conference of Canada which set out in legislative form the procedures which have in fact evolved over the last ten years; evolved that is, as a result of 20 years of experience with the existing legislation and which would make these practices and procedu res uniform across Canada. For example, Mr.

Speaker, when an order made in another jurisdiction has been registered for enforce ment in Ma nitoba, sections of the Act specify the procedures to be followed where this registration is challenged and further specify the narrow grounds for setting aside registration of the order made in the other ju risdiction. A further

section of the bill estab lishes certain ap peal procedures for any matter that comes within the ambit of the legislation. The most substantial change in procedure con tained in the proposed bill and, remember it's a re enactment of an existing piece of legislation; the most substantial change relates to the problem of varying, that is changing an order that is already in existence, varying an Or der of Maintenance.

Under the present legislation where there has been a change in circum stances of either one of the spouses, an appli cation to vary a Maintenance Or der can only be made to the Court in the province where the order was originally made. If you just think of the hardship that creates for someone who has moved and particularly someone who is dependent on such an order. So that where a party has moved to another province, under existing legislation, that party is forced to return to the prov ince where the order was originally made in order to get a variation.

This procedure is slow; it's expe nsive; it involves considerable hardship particularly as such app lications are usually made because there has been a change for the worse in the party who ... circumstances in that party's financial situation. A

section has been included in the bill to remedy this situation. This

section permits a party to apply to vary the original maintenance order in a court in the juris diction in which that party resides, even where the original order was granted elsewhere. Before an order varying the maintenance can be made, however, so that both parties are protected, the matter must be sent to the jurisdiction where the responding party resides to give that other party the opportu nity to respond. So, what then would happen is that - let's say the wife, who is the recipient of maintenance under an order, her situation has worsened; she wants to vary for an increase, she can apply.

Let's suppose that she now lives in Manitoba but the order was made in British Columbia; she can apply here for the varia tion; it can be granted, but before it can be enforced, it is sent to B.C. so that the husband, let's say, still residing can make any answer to it that is open to that husband. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, where one of the party still resides in the jurisdiction in which the original maintenance order was made, only then the court in that jurisdiction has the power to make a final deci- sion as to whether or not to order variatio n.

This section, this variation, is modelled on the provisions of The 19 81 Uniform Act but we have here, as other jurisdictions have, depar ted from the Uniform Bill to the extent we provide that although an app lication can be commenced in another court only the court which made the original Order of Maintenance has the power to make the final decision to vary its own order. It's our view that the omission of this provision, which is now incorpo rated in the proposed bill, would work an injustice on a dependent family which has remained in the province where the order was origi nally granted.

The Province of Ontario has adopted this change in its proposed legislation and also the Federal-Pr ovincial Committee on Enforcement of Maintenance and Custody Or ders, a body consisting of representatives of all of the provinces dealing in the area of Family Law, and the Federal Go vernment has recommended that the provinces adopt The 19 81 Uni form Act with that particular change. I'm therefore, Mr. Speaker, recommending that Bill No. 1 O, to repeal and replace The Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders Act be enacted as proposed. I have a copy of these notes for the members opposite. MR.

SPEAKE R: The Honou rable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Mem ber for Rhineland that the debate on this bill be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Government House Leader. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE 836 MR. PENNER: First an announcement, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to announce that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts will meet on Tuesday, April 6 and if required also on Tuesday, April 13 and Tuesday, April 20 at 10 :00 a.m. in Room 253 , to consider the last Annual Report of the Provincial Auditor and the Pub lic Accounts for the Province for the fiscal year ending March 31 , 19 81. I wished to make that announcement and then, Mr . Speaker, I would like to move, seconded by the Hon ourable Minister of Health, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEA KE R: The Honour able Mem ber for Springfield. MR. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker , if we have leave, can I suggest that rather than moving into Committee for the six or seven minutes that are available, that we move into Private Mem bers' Hour at the end and call it 4:30 for now, and then at 5:30 we can adjou rn. We have the right now to go into Committee and can carry on at 8:00.

Thursday, 25 March, 1982 MR. SPEAKER: Do we have the leave of the House to move into Private Members' Hour? If that is agreed, we will then move into Private Members' Hour. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pem bina on a point of order. MR. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker, would we then be cal ling it 5:30 at 5: 25? MR. SPEAKER: As the members wish. PRIV ATE MEMBE RS' HOUR MR. SPEAKER: The motion before the House is the proposed Resolution of the Honourable Mem ber for Tuxedo, as amended, by the Honourable Member for River East, I believe. RE SOLUTION N0. 1 -T ASK FORCE RE DECLINING SCH OOL ENROL MENT MR.

SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN (Elmwood): Mr .

Speaker, the Resolution has been amended and I might just in beginning refresh the minds of members by reading it: "That the Govern ment of Manitoba through the Department of Education, include the topic of declin ing school enrolments as it affects future planning for the ed ucatio nal pr ograms in school divisions throughout the province and bring forth recommen dations in guidelines which will be of assistance to Manitoba School Divisions in their future planning as an intregal part of the government's one-year review of education finance." So, in light of that, the proposal by the Honourable Member for Tuxedo can be and will be dealt with as part of that general review.

Mr . Speaker, in the last few weeks in relation to this Resolution, I've spoken to a number of young couples to talk to them about the broader question of not only declining enrolments which can have several factors behind it, but also the question of a declining popula tion and a declining birth rate. What seems to be happening in our society from coast to coast is that young couples, in particular, are being hard hit by inflation and by a downturn in the economy and, as a result, are putting off having families and concentrat ing on saving money to purchase housing.

This is something that I think is evident, that with the state of the economy and the value of the dollar, that there are very few young couples who can settle down in the first few years of marriage and start raising a family in Canada today. I think this is probably even more of a problem for people in cities like Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto where there is a horrendous increase in the price of housing and in the cost of mortgages. Mr . Speaker, I was talking to a relative of mine a few weeks ago from Vanco uver.

He now has a family that is fully grown but he had to suffer the change from a 13 .5 percent mortgage to a 22.5 percent mortgage and anybody looking at taking out a mortgage in that particular price range wo1,Jld surely not only have to 837 think twice but three times as well. Because I would assume that money at that rate probably doubles in about three-and-a-half years and anybody who is contemplating a first purchase as opposed to winding up the tail-e nd of a mortgage obviously is going to defer and delay that particular decision.

So, just what the long-term effect of all this is going to be is difficult to say but I think that politicia ns and decision-makers and sociologists, etc., are going have to, at some point address the question of a dec lining pop ulation and decide whether or not they are going to be able to come up with some ideas about encouraging young couples to have a family, whether this is going to be a new baby bonus system or some policy of tax benefits or incentives.

Something is going to have to be done, otherwise the population is going to go from zero population growth to probably where it's getting to today of a negative popul ation growth. -(I nterjection)- Well, one of my colleagues says let the men have the babies. That's something I hadn't thought of before but certainly is an interesting suggestion.

One of the issues though that I think the Mem ber for Tuxedo is going to have to add ress in regard to this particular resolution and some of his colleagues is the fact that it was their government which I believe had a direct negative effect on the schools and school clos ings in the Province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, it was under their government that 40,000 Manitobans in their term of office left the pro vince.

I don't have a breakdown of the age categories of that group, but one could assume that if 40,000 people left in an exodus from the province because of the poor state of the economy which was a direct result of the economic policies and the nonthrust of the Lyon administration then I think it would be rea sonable to assume that probably half would be school age children. If there were some 20,000 students among that group that left for other provinces, you take one or 200 lots and divide it into 20,000 then I think it's probab ly true to say that probably 10 0 schools or their eq uivalent were lost an

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-21a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 21a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	845da321a11a91a6f50ef31accfaf718e97a422d

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