Manitoba Hansard — 20 May 1987 (Sitting 51, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-51

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 20 May, 1987. Time - 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again . I move , seconded by the Member for Lac du Bonnet, that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'd like to table the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review for 1987-88 Estimates for the Manitoba Civil Service Commission, and Manitoba Finance. MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motion ... Introduction of Bills . . INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have 52 students from Grade 5 from the Park La Salle School. The students are under the direction of Mrs. R.

Cyr, and the school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert . On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS CCIL - total amount of write-off loans MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Finance. Order-in-Council No. 1330, which was passed by Cabinet on the 3rd of December 1986, authorized the Minister of Finance to write off $2.975 million of loans presently outstanding to the Canadian Cooperative Implements Limited.

My question to the Minister of Finance is: What was the total amount of write-off of loans outstanding to CCIL, exclusive of the restructuring that was announced last week? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have to take that question as notice and provide the information for the member . CCIL - why loan was written off, not converted to equity MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, a further question to the Minister of Finance is: Given the restructuring that was announced last week involved the conversion of loans and loan guarantees to equity in the CCIL, why was this amount of loans not included in that restructuring so that it too could have been recovered by way of conversion to equity at some future point in time? Why was it written off,

whereas some other portion of debt loan was actually converted to equity? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co op Development. HON. J. COWAN: Yes, Madam Speaker . The fact is that the loan which the Leader of the Opposition is speaking to now was a loan that was actually written off as part of the 1985 agreement and was announced at that time to be written off in a number of stages.

The fact that it was later on written off in the manner in which it was by the O/C, which the Leader of the Opposition referenced, was upon advice from the Department of Finance that would be the better way to write off that particular loan, rather than to write it off over a period of years.

So when we entered into negotiations most recently with Vicon and Co-operative Implements to strike an agreement which, by the way, provided for the continuation of Co-op Implements; provided for a healthier Vicon; provided for a healthier farm implement industry in the province and jobs and parts for farmers who needed parts, who owned Co-op Implement equipment, provided for all those things; when we entered into that particular agreement, Madam Speaker, we were only dealing with the loan guarantees.

We are not taking equity per se - and one may want to quibble about the definition of equity - but we very carefully did not want to take equity in C.I. or in Vicon as a result of that agreement, but we wanted to provide for a mechanism that would allow us to recover the 50 percent of the loan guarantee which, by the way, 2184

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 was provided to C.I. under the Conservative administration when they were in government, provide for our recovery of the 50 percent that we were paying out at this particular time if, in fact , the operation was profitable. We believe that was a fair and equitable way to proceed . CCIL - total amount of write-off loans MR. G.

FILMON: Given that the Minister of Co-op Development seems to have additional information on this matter , I wonder if he could tell the House and tell us what was the total amount of write-off of loans and debt that the Government of Manitoba had in CCIL , exclusive of the restructuring. HON. J. COWAN: I'm not certain that I fully understand what additional information the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting I'm now providing that hasn't been provided earlier, Madam Speaker .- (lnterjection)- MR. G. FILMON: Perhaps by clarification , Madam Speaker. HON. J. COWAN: Well, just . . . if I can continue .

In fact -(Interjection)- well, the Member for St. Norbert says I'm used to proceeding when I'm not certain. In fact, I'm use to proceeding in such a fashion so I have to help the Leader of the Opposition and others on that side out of the predicament they get themselves into when they make wrong assumptions and wrong statements . I'm perfectly pleased to be able to do that if it does, in fact , help them better understand what has transpired and what the purpose of our negotiations were, and what the expected and anticipated outcomes of those negotiations are .

In fact, the loan was written off and announced, clearly so, when the document was tabled and made public for the 2.95 last year in the 1986 agreement, the'85- 86, in that period of time . The most recent agreement dealt with the outstanding loan guarantees . The previous agreement had called for us to provide - and this again was all made public, I'd like to refresh the Leader of the Opposition's memory on this - provided for us to pay the interest on those loan guarantees for one year, and then we would review the situation at the end of the year.

In fact, when we sat down to discuss how we felt this government could best serve the farmers and the workers who were involved in those industries and the Co-op Implements distribution network throughout the province, we decided , based on the material that was provided to us, Madam Speaker, that it would be necessary to write off 50 percent of the loans . We did so in such a fashion as to allow us to recover that 50 percent ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please , order please. HON. J. COWAN: .. . if, in fact, those operations were a problem ; that's a good deal for the Province of Manitoba .

MADAM SPEAKER: May I remind honourable members that answers to questions should be brief. MR. G. FILMON: Well, Madam Speaker , it's not only myself who needs to be provided with this additional information clarification. I think the Minister ought to provide it for his Minister of Finance, who just took the question as notice and who signed this Order-in Council, so that he can have the information and the government can know what manipulations the Minister of Co-op Development is up to. A MEMBER: Right on . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister of Co-op Development on a point of order. HON. J.

COWAN: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, there were two statements that the Leader of the Opposition made which need to be corrected. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a point of order? HON. J. COWAN: It amounts to a point of order, Madam Speaker. The first was that the Minister of Finance, for some reason , had not provided accurate information. If, in fact, the Leader of the Opposition would read the Financial Report , 1985-86 , from the Manitoba Finance MADAM SPEAKER: What is the honourable member's -(Interjection)- Order please . What is the honourable member 's point of order? HON. J.

COWAN: Madam Speaker, the point of order is that there has been an inference by the Leader of the Opposition . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . HON. J. COWAN: I'm sorry. If the Leader of the Opposition would listen to his own words more carefully , he will recall that he said that the Minister of Finance had not provided the information, did not know the information and, in fact , it has been tabled in this House. And he, furthermore, suggested that I was entering into manipulations around this particular issue.

Madam Speaker, if there has been any attempt to manipulate information, it has been on the part of members opposite . What we've been trying to do is MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please . Order please! The honourable member , in my opinion , does not have a point of order . I did not get the same inferences from the comments of the Honourable Leader of the Opposition . However, question period is a time for questions, not a time for debate. 2185

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 City of Winnipeg water supply - proposed land exchange MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the ', Opposition with a question . ' MR. G. FILMON: Yes, Madam Speaker , I intend not ,. to have any debate in this matter , despite the abuse of the Government House Leader . MADAM SPEAKER: Question. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Given the threat to the City of Winnipeg 's water supply that would be posed by a number of proposed developments at Shoal Lake and , in fact, given that a · University of Manitoba Biology Professor has now , indicated a grave concern about a proposed cottage lot development that could have the potential to contaminate the city's water supply, I wonder if the Premier can indicate whether or not his government has proposed a land exchange whereby the development rights, and indeed the right to the land that is being proposed for cottage-lot development, could be exchanged for other land within the Province of Manitoba to remove that threat to the City of · Winnipeg's water supply .

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of the Environment. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Madam Speaker . Madam Speaker, our position on this particular issue, is the same as I've heard the Leader of the Opposition voice when he was responsible for Environment , in 1981 when he stated that their concern - and that is our 1 concern - was that the quality of the water of the City of Winnipeg be protected.

In spite of that process, we have indicated all along, Madam Speaker, that we are prepared to sit down with the other parties and to negotiate a settlement that is acceptable to all, and that continues to be our position . MR. G. FILMON: I thank the Minister of the Environment for assuring that I've been consistent over the years . I asked the Premier whether or not one of the options that has been proposed by the Government of Manitoba is a land exchange so that we can be removed from this threat of the cottage-lot development? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . That question is repetitious. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker , I'm asking the Premier whether or not a land exchange has been proposed to the Indian band in Shoal Lake so that we can have the threat of pollution to our water supply removed? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . That question is the same question that the Minister of the Environment just answered . An honourable member cannot determine which member answers the question. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, I wonder if I could ask the Premier whether or not he would consider proposing a land exchange to remove the threat of a cottage-lot development from the Shoal Lake Indian Band to the City of Winnipeg's water supply. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I think it's a much more responsible course that any negotiations , any proposals , be done not in this Chamber, but as amongst the parties themselves who are affected. Conference Board of Canada - reasons for downgrading of economic forecast MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, a few days ago I asked the Minister of Finance if the Conference Board of Canada had given him prior notice of a major downgrading of the economic forecasts of this province. Last Friday that Conference Board reported that there was major downgrading in two aspects of economic indicators . Firstly, real economic growth was to drop from 3.5 to 2.4 percent in the space of three months, Madam Speaker; and secondly, employment creation was also to fall significantly .

My question to the Minister of Finance , Madam Speaker : Has the Minister, through discussions with the Conference Board, apprised himself as to the reasons that there has been such a major downgrading of the forecasts of the Manitoba economy in 1987, and even more severe in 1988? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Again the Member for Morris is misrepresenting what has been reported by the Conference Board of Canada .

Firstly, Madam Speaker, the Conference Board of Canada revised all of its estimates for economic growth in Canada, including the Provice of Manitoba. The Conference Board also indicates in its report that the Manitoba economy is expected to continue to grow at a rate faster than any other province in Canada, other than the two central provinces of Quebec and Ontario . It also indicates in this report, Madam Speaker, that the economic growth is expected to continue at a pace that will ensure that employment growth will continue, will grow faster, so that we'll see a decrease in unemployment in our province .

That is what the Conference Board of Canada Report states about the economic growth in the Province of Manitoba. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris with a supplementary . MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker, the question was very specific . I asked for the reasons for the downgrading. My supplementary question : Has the Minister of Finance asked either the Royal Bank of Canada, the Investment Dealers' Association of Canada, or indeed the Conference Board of Canada as to why this major 2186

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 downgrading within this province has occurred? Could he indicate whether or not the major reason for that was that he and this Budget that has come forward , causing the greatest tax grab and removal of disposable income from the citizens of this province in the history of this province ; is that the reason that we 've had this major downgrading of our economic forecast? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Again, we have the Member for Morris providing misinformation, as he and other members of his caucus have done on a continuous basis.

In terms of his assumption that somehow the revenue increases that were put in place by this government were the largest in the history of the Province of Manitoba, he is incorrect. The largest increase in revenue in the history of Manitoba is when a Conservative Government brought in sales taxes in this province , and increased revenues at higher percentages than what we've done in this Budget, Madam Speaker . What is he suggesting?

Is he suggesting that we follow the course of his colleagues in the Province of Alberta or the Province of Saskatchewan, Madam Speaker , where they're reducing services to the citizens in those provinces, at the same time they're increasing taxes at rates higher , in the case of Alberta, than the Province of Manitoba and, at the same time , seeing a large increase in their deficit to a point that is much higher than the Province of Manitoba. Is that what he is suggesting? Is that the kind of Budget that he would bring in if he was Minister of Finance in the Province of Manitoba?

Conference Board of Canada - impact of downgrading MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris with a question . MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker , given the fact that these are the numbers that were presented , and the Minister cannot hide from them at all, the fact is that this provincial economy is beginning to sputter in a major fashion. My question to the Minister of Finance is: What impact will this major downgrading of forecasting of the economy have on forecasted revenue? How much of an increase is there going to be in the defic it from that given in the Budget on March 16? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: We continue to see, Madam Speaker, the doom and gloom attitude of the members opposite. It was the case going back through all of the years of this government in office since 1981 , where they predicted that the economy in Manitoba is going down the tubes. And what we've seen, Madam Speaker, is a continued improvement in the economy of Manitoba.

We've continued to see growth in terms of jobs in the Province of Manitoba, growth in terms of investment, contrary to the kind of approach and the kind of policies that put Manitoba into the most severe recession that it saw during their term in government , Madam Speaker. The reverse has been true during our term in government . The situation that exists right now is that we are experiencing continued growth, Madam Speaker.

If you look beyond what the member raises, if you look at what's even reported in the newspapers, because that's where he seems to loo k for some of his advice , he would see articles like this talking about plant openings. (lnterjection}- Madam Speaker, they don 't seem to want to listen to what's happening in the Province of Manitoba .

If you would look just at a simple source like the newspaper, you would see articles like the opening of a new firm, R-Plus Insulated Glass, an investment of $1.1 milliOn and 20 jobs in Manitoba; an announceme nt of 300 new medical plant jobs in the Province of Manitoba, new investment in our province , confidenc e by business in Manitoba and growth in our economy. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. VIA Rail - secondary maintenance facility MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan . MR. M. DOLIN: Thank you , Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Transport , Madam Speaker .

In 1985, VIA Rail cancelled the maintenance program for the City of Winnipeg , saying they were going to be buying new rail car s and that Montreal and Toronto would be sufficient. Now yesterday, I understand there was a recent announcement by VIA Rail they will not be buying new rail cars and , instead of putting a maintenance facility in Winnipeg , they will be having a main maintenance facility in Vancouver , with a secondary maintenance facility in Winnipeg . I would lik e to ask the Minister of Transport, has he been consulted by the Federal Minist er and what are the details?

Will we be secondary to Vancouver? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Ministe r of Highways and Transportation. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker , the Member for Pembina does not like to have reference to the negative federal decisions in this province. Madam Speaker , regrettably, we were not consulted on this issue.

That is extremely disappointing for us, but the fact is it seems that even the senior Federal Cabinet Minister in the Province of Manitoba was not consulted, nor were the other members of the Conservative caucus when this decision was made by the Federal Government and the Minister , John Crosbie , as announced yesterday . Madam Speaker, the fact is, as the Member for Kildonan has pointed out, only two years ago there was a cancellation of the $28 million VIA Maintenance Centre that would have created some 250 jobs in the province and in Winnipeg.

Now we're having a recycling of a smaller version of that that will see Vancouver having indeed the greatest benefits from the VIA maintenance centre . Madam Speaker, I have just indicated to the . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. May I remind honourable members that answers should be brief. 2187

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 VIA Rail - consultation with Federal Minister MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: Thank you , Madam Speaker , a supplementary. Could the Minister take responsibility for contacting his federal counterpart to see why the Federal Government seems to defy geography of Winnipeg being the central location for rail area and then making Vancouver, if that is true, the centre point? It strikes me as being in total defiance of reality . Can the Minister contact his federal counterpart and protest? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker , as I was about to indicate to the House at the time that I was cut off , I was indeed communicating . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, it seems the Oppo sition doesn 't want to hear the answers again . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . It seems the Opposition agrees that the honourable member should not reflect on the Chair. The Honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation with an answer. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker , I apologize for reflecting on the Chair, if indeed that is the

interpretation of yourself as Speaker. The fact is that I have communicated with the Federal Minister. We'll be sending a telex this afternoon that will clearly express our concerns about this decision , and ask the Federal Minister for details and impress on him the need to consult with Manitoba on major transportation decisions like this.

The fact is he is not even consulting with the province , he is not consulting with his counterparts in Western Canada, and we see the Member for Provencher again left out in the dark on a very important decision, not wielding any weight in the Federal Cabinet and not articulating any vision for Manitoba. It is necessary , Madam Speaker, for the Federal M.P.'s from Manitoba and from Western Canada to articulate a vision and carry out that vision on behalf of Manitobans . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order, order. May I remind honourable members that question period is not a time for debate .

The Honourable Member for Kildonan with a question . MR. M. DOLIN: A final supplementary , Madam Speaker . I'm somewhat appalled at the jocularity on the other side of the House on this significant issue . The fact is, I am asking the Minister of Transport from the Province of Manitoba to try and ensure that Manitoba, which is the centre of transportation for Western Canada, remains so. I would like to ask the Minister: When will he contact his Federal counterpart to get a response? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Spea ker, I don 't blame the Member for Kildonan for not hearing the answer.

There's nothing but noise coming from the Opposition who don't wish to hear the answers. The fact is, this is a very serious matter for Manitoba because Manitoba has historically been, geographically, a major transportation centre in this country , and this has been eroded by several decisions that have been made by the Federal Government. We have not stood idly by, and we will not in this case .

I have indicated to the Federal Minister that we want him to ensure, and his counterparts in Manitoba, his colleagues, to ensure that this province maintains its role and enhances its role as a transportation centre for Canada . Program to assist Natives in justice system - re review report MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you , Madam Speaker, I have a question to the Minister of Native Affairs . Will the Minister of Native Affairs, on behalf of the Native community, make public a review that was done of the program that assisted Natives through the justice system?

Will he make that report public? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs . HON. E. HARPER: I'd maybe refer that question to the Attorney-General. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: I presume that the member might want to clarify that he's talking about the study that was done on the Court Communicators Program? Or do you not know? MR. J. DOWNEY: Madam Speaker, I'm somewhat surprised that the Attorney-General has not communicated with the Minister of Native Affairs on such an important matter dealing with .. .

MADAM SPEAKER : Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J. DOWNEY: The question is dealing with that particular program that helps the Native accused through the justice system, the one that the Minister , the Attorney-General referred to in the press as that he wasn't instructing it to be kept under wraps. The question is still to the Minister of Native Affairs. Will he make that study public, the program, Madam Speaker, that assists the Native community through the judicial system? SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader . 2188

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker , on a point of order. The member s opposite are in a very good mood today, so good that they find it necessary to laugh at the transfer of workers from here to Vancouver , so necessary that they derive . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a point of order? HON. J. COWAN: On the point of order. The Member for Arthur has referenced a study, but he has neglected - perhaps he is unable to do so, but he should be able to do so if he's asking the question - to exactly describe what study it is he wishes to have tabled.

If in fact, Madam Speaker , it is a study that was done under the aegis of the Attorney-General, then the question should be directed to the Attorney-General by long-established rules and precedents in this House, which he should be aware of at the very least. If he knows the name of the study, let him say what the study is; if he doesn 't, let him go back, do some more research and come here with a better thought-out question so we can answer it . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur on the point of order. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you , Madam - on a point of order? MADAM SPEAKER: On the point of order.

MR. J. DOWNEY: No, I h ave a question, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: We have a point of order on the floor . SPEAKER'S RULING MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader rose on a point of order, suggesting tha t the Honourable Member for Arthur was trying to determine which Minister, I believe, should answer a question . At least I think that's what he was trying to stress. An honourable member can ask any particular Minister a question. They can choose whether they want to answer it or not , or they can refer it to another appropriate Minister. The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Thank you , Madam Speaker . In view of the fact that the Minister of Native Affairs agreed that there was a study and made reference to the Attorney-General, of which the study was carried out under, I again ask the Minister responsible for Native Affairs ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . The Honourable Minister of Native Affairs, on a point of order? HON. E. HARPER: Yes. I did not agree that there was a study done. I just referred the question to the Attorney-General. MADAM SPEAKER: A dispute over the facts is not a point of order. The Honourable Member for Arthur to finish his question .

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Arthur has the floor , to finish his question . MR. J. DOWNEY: Madam Speaker , in view of the fact that the Premier , the Attorney-General , and the government want to make trivia out of an extremely important matter dealing with the Native community MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Would the honourable member ask his question? MR. J. DOWNEY: . . . and whether or not they are properly treated through the judicial and court system. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please .

Would the honourable member care to ask hi s question without stating an opinion or making a speech? The Honourable Member for Arthur with his question. MR. J. DOWNEY: Madam Speaker, I won't back up for the Premier , the Attorney-General , or any of his communist friends . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Does the Honourable Member for Arthur have a question ? MR. J. DOWNEY: Yes, I do, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Would he please place it? MR. J. DOWNEY: Yes, I will, Madam Speaker. To the Minister of Northern Affairs.

Will the Minister of Northern Affairs carry out a study of the communicators ' process, or the process of Nat ives going through the court system? Will he have a study carried out and then table it so the public knows whether or not, Madam Speaker , they have been treated fairly in the court system? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J.

COWAN: Madam Speaker, in the spirit of cooperation and attempting to help the Member for Arthur out of this difficult position which he has manoeuvred himself into through his own ignorance of the issue, I would quote to you Citation 357 of Beauchesne, Item (x); it says that a question shall not "deal with an action of a Minister for which he is not responsible to Parliament. " 2189

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 As the Member for Arthur should be aware, the Attorney-General is responsible for that particular area and if, in fact, the Attorney-General could clarify and provide some information to the Member for Arthw;, which I'm certain he is seeking in the end result, perhaps we can help him out of a difficult position and have him understand this situation more thoroughly . MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, Madam Speaker, we were only trying to help the Member for Arthur , but some people are beyond help .

The fact is, Madam Speaker, that there was a study , very recently completed , on the Nat ive Court Communicator System . That study was received by me a few weeks ago . I have not had a chance to peruse it. As soon as I've had a chance to peruse it, I'd be more than happy to make it public . This is a federal-provincial cost-shared prog ram . This is a program that is conducted , in the main , on behalf of the partners, by Chief Provincial Judge Harold Gyles . Of course , it will be made public , and it will be made public in the near future.

Highway 67 - meeting re opposition to MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS . S. CARSTAIRS : Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is to the First Minister. Madam Speaker , the Member for Lakeside and I have raised , on several occasions, the difficulties that are faced by those individuals who live in Stonewall and are opposed to the development of Highway 67 along the north route , but there has been no response from this government to their plight .

Will the Premier attend the final last-ditch effort on the part of the citizens to express to this government their concerns, to a meeting he has been invited to attend tomorrow evening at the Rockwood Municipal Offices in Stonewall? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, I have indicated to this House and to the Member for Lakeside , who is the MLA for that area and, through him at the Estimates discussions, to some constituents who also attended , that we have considered this whole issue very carefully over the last number of years.

This is an issue that has been ongoing for several years , even before I became involved as Minister of Highways and Transpor tation with it . We have endeavoured to look at all possible options. The fact is that the existing highway to Stonewall requires upgrading because it is in an unsafe condition . On that basis, after considering the wishes of the landowners in the area , so that they would be affected in the least possible way with land that is required for the upgrading, it will finally go ahead.

That decision was communicated to the landowners and to the people of the area, with the support of the Town of Stonewall, and the Chamber of Commerce in that area, two years ago , and the process has been ongoing in acquiring the property since that time. This was known by them for two years, at least, that we would have to go ahead with the upgrading of the existing road and we are continuing to do that , cognizant of course that there are concerns being raised by those who are affected , and we understand those concerns. Highway 67 - attendance of Minister at meeting MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: A supplementary question to the Minister of Highways. Why will the Minister not at least subscribe to their campaign literature which said they stand up for ordinary Manitobans , and go to this meeting and speak to these ordinary Manitobans? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, I am prepared to meet with any members of the media, if they have questions that they would like to ask about the government's position on this issue . This group of constituents, of individuals, is proposing to hold a press conference; that is between them and the media.

They can hold their press conference and certainly, if the media has any questions, I am prepared to answer all of those questions on the government's position, Madam Speaker. Highway 67 - procedure for residents to make views known MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A final supplementary to the Minister of Highways . Can the Minister inform the House if there's any other procedure by which these community residents can make their views known to the government before the steam-rolling of this government is replaced by the steam-rollers on the roads? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, as I've explained to the member, this is an issue that has been ongoing for some 10 years . There are piles of communication that have developed over those years. There have been meetings held with the residents in my office; there have been meetings held in Stonewall; there has been an open house held in Stonewall. We have consulted with the R.M.'s and with the Town of Stonewall, as well as with the Chamber of Commerce and other groups in that area. We have gone through a lengthy process, Madam Speaker, and the decision was made three years ago ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . HON. J.

PLOHMAN: ... and it was consulted, and we have considered . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Would the Honourable Member for Lakeside please come to order . MR. H. ENNS: I don't want the $1 million . Give it to the Minister of Health; give it to the Minister of Community Services. My people don't want that $1 million spent on that road, simple and clear . 2190

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights asked the Honourable Minister. The Honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation to finish his answer. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'd like to finish, Madam Speaker . It seems _unfortunate, Madam Speaker, that the Member for Lakeside has chosen to enter into this debate. The fact is that he is advocating that we continue to have this unsafe highway in the same condition, and that we do not upgrade it, Madam Speaker.

If that is the kind of representation that he is giving to his constituents, we will very seriously have to cons ider his opinion in this matter, Madam Speaker . We are undertaking this upgrading because that highway needs upgrading desperatel y, and everyone in that area agrees that there needs to be some repairs done to that road . The impact on the residents is being kept to a minimum . The matter of another road, another access into Stonewall , is a decision that can be made subsequently . We're not going to be bullied into that decision at this time, Madam Speaker .

Manitoba Labour Board - government policy re appointments to MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West . MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker , yesterday the Attorney-General made a feeble and not very intelligent attempt ... MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J. McCRAE: He made his attempt to defend The Manitoba Labour Relations Act. Today I'll direct my question to the Minister of Labour, from the mediocre to the incompetent, Madam Speaker .

How long, Madam Speaker , has it been government policy to appoint and reappoint people to the Manitoba Labour Board for terms of three years and then revoke the appointments three weeks later? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour . HON. A. MACKLING: Perhaps, Madam Speaker, the honourable member can amplify and give some particularity to his question , and thereby I'll be able to answer it. MR. J. McCRAE: I refer to two Orders-in-Council, both of them signed by this Minister who needs amplification .

Madam Speaker, on February 11 of this year the Minister appointed by Order -in -Council No. 182, Nick Evans , Robert Henderson, Griff Tripp and William Gardner, Jr. to the Manitoba Labour Board; 21 days later he cancelled those appointments . Would the Minister like to tell us why? HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker , the process - (Interjection)- If the honourable members want an answe r, I'm sure they will be sufficiently quiet that I'll be able to hear myself speaking, Madam Speaker .

Madam Speaker , the process of appointments to the Manitoba Labour Board, as prov ided for in the act - and I'm sure the Honourable Member for Brandon West is thoroughly conversant with that - is through the board Chair writing to both labour and management representation and asking them for lists of people who could be recommended to be appointed to the board. The board Chair did indicate the concern that there be a continuing representation of women in respect to the board.

When we made the appointment , confirmed by Order-in-Council - the earlier Order-in-Council the honourable member referred to - it was not at that time confirmed to my satisfaction that there had been an addressing of that concern . Therefore, that Order-in-Council was held and the issue of appointments referred back by the chairperson of the Labour Board so that a review could be made of those people , and I am still awaiting further recommendations in respect to the further appointments necessary . MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker , the Minister says that the Order-in-Council was held.

It was signed by the Lieutenant- Governor of this province. I find that hard to understand, Madam Speaker . Manitoba Labour Board - appointment of women MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J. McCRAE: If the Minister had wanted women to be appointed to the board and if he does want to interfere with these things, as he says he doesn 't want to do but then he says he does , if he'd wanted women to be on the board, why didn't he make that clear prior to February 11, when he signed this Order-in-Council , and then later revoke those appointments to be replaced by no one?

He told us today that no one is available to rep lace them. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please , order please . The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, I'm sure honourable members want to have fun over any issue today. They 're in a fun mood. The fact is that I've been away on a holiday; I've just come back - given to understand there was some urgency in respect to the passage of the Order-in-Council, and the matter was dealt with subsequent to the Order-in-Council having been passed.

I ascertained that there wasn't the same balance that had existed in respect to male and female members on the board. It was because of that concern that the Order-in-Council was not acted upon, although it was passed, and then a subsequent Order-in-Council did provide for appointment and a reference back through the Chair of the Lab our Board, to ensure that there would be adequate female representation on the board. 2191

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 Manitoba Labour Board - confidence in MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker , I have a question for the . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order , order please. MR. J. McCRAE: A question for the First Minister . Madam Speaker, we've been hearing defences in this House of The Manitoba Labour Relations Act and defences of this Minister of Labour ever since this Session began.

Madam Speaker , I ask the First Min ister : How can the people of this province, people like Jennifer Campbell , for instance , have confidence and faith in the impartial ity of the Labour Board when the appointments to that board are gerry mandered and messed around with in this way? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , that may very well be occurring elsewhere . It has not occurred in the Province of Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, the only attempt to interfere with the quasi-judicia l process has been on the part of the Member for Brandon West , who 's attempted to intervene through this Chamber in two matters that are before the Labour Board in the Province of Manitoba, an objective Labour Board representing business and labour . It has been the Member for Brandon West who, on two occasions in the last three weeks , has atte mpted without success to intervene in the proceedings of a quasi judicial body in the Province of Manitoba. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker , a question for the First Minis ter and for the Deputy Premier .

Are the signatures, H. Pawley and Muriel Smith, forgeries on these documents? MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. COMMITTEE CHANGES MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan . MR. M. DOLIN: Thank you , Madam Speaker . I move, seconded by the Member for Elmwood , that the compos ition of Standing Committees on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: D. Scott for the Honourable G. Lecuyer. MADAM SPEAKER: Th e Honourable Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Madam Speaker .

I would advise of a committee change of the Public Utilities, the Member for Pembina ... A MEMBER: They don't even know where he's from. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order. The Honour ab le Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: I'm enjoying an awful great tim e today, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: So am I. MR. A. KOVNATS: The Member for Pembina for the Member for Morris. ORDERS OF THE DAY HOUSE BUSINESS MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J.

COWAN: Yes, Madam Speaker, on House Business , I believe there 's an inclination to forego Private Members ' Hour and continue on with the discussion of the Estimates in the Committees of Supply, if we are in fact in the Committees of Supply by that time. MADAM SPEAKER: Is that agreed? (Agreed) HON. J.

COWAN: Madam Speaker, prior to that, would you please call Bills No. 32, 25, 33, 34, 35, on Second Reading , in that order and, following that , w ould you please call the bills listed on the Order Paper under Debate On Second Readings, starting with Bill No. 6 on page 1 and continuing through , inclusive, to Bill No. 31 on page 2. SECOND READING BILL NO. 32 - THE RETAIL BUSINESSES HOLIDAY CLOSING ACT HON. A. MACKLING presented Bill No. 32, The Retail Businesses Holiday Closing Act ;

Loi sur les jours feries dans le commerce de detail, for Second Reading . MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour . HON. A. MACKLING: Thank you , Madam Speaker . I'm sure that all honourable members are as pleased as I am to be bringing back into the Legislature for further consideration the question of retail business hours ' closing .

The bill which is before the House, Bill 32, does essentially what was provided for in Bill 7, earlier introduced , and does make some refinements of issues that were identified in the course of further consideration and further consultation in respect to the whole issue of retail stores closing . Madam Speaker , I will allude to some of those specific areas. As members will recall, the provisions of Bill 7 did clarify and improve upon the wording of

an act which had been around in excess of a decade, which essentially provided for a pause day in the commercial 2192

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 activity of the Province of Manitoba. Bill 7 confirmed the continuing need for such a pause day, and established that there would be a maximum of four people employed in any retail business establishment that chose to be open on a Sunday in addition to being open on a Saturday. It is, of course, optional for any retail business to open at all but, where they do open, they choose to open either on a Saturday with all of their retail outlets or the Sunday, unless they fall into an exempt category.

The basic exemption of four staff in total is the same in Bill 32 as that in Bill 7, but we provided a further provision to allow for the 24-hour convenience store operations. Any 24-hour operation will be enabled to have a maximum of six people working during their 24-hour period , which will enable them to operate with a minimum of two staff particularly in hours of the day or evening or night, the small hours of the morning , where it's been identified as being more of a concern from a safety point of view.

Bill 32 also provides for specific exemption by Order of Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council for special events and undertakings within the province , whether it be a fair, an exhibition. For example, if there 's a consensus in a community that the larger stores should be open to convenience the tourists who may otherwise be desirous of shopping in those larger centres in a community at a time of a special event , then consideration will be given to providing that exemption either for one store or a number of stores in that area .

A further provision has been put in the act to specify that during emergency situations , emergencies such as has occurred early last fall - the very substantial snowfall we had in Manitoba - emergency situations such as that, or flood conditions, then upon request the Minister of Labour would be enabled to grant an exemption to provide for emergency situations. Bill 32 also does again improve upon the wording of the exempting sections, particularly wording in respect to the exemption for pharmaceutical operations .

We believe that the wording now will provide for greater clarity and greater certainty should there be a further

interpretation of the act, as we trust it will be when passed by the Legislature , so that there won't be the same degree of ambiguity or uncertainty in the

interpretation of the act. Madam Speaker, I have , since the whole issue of Sunday stores closing or Sunday stores opening, become prominent in the media. I have been the recipient, of course, of many, many written submissions , part of which were engendered by parties in the dispute. The Independent Retail Merchants did encourage people to write to me or clip a coupon and send it to me.

My office received many, many thousands of coupons from people who clipped the coupon, put it in an envelope of their own addressing, put a stamp on it and sent it to me, indicating their concern about any substantial change in retail store operations. So there was a significant manifestation of political will or political concern in respect to this issue by great numbers of Manitobans. And not only did I receive the submissions of Manitobans through that clipping of a coupon but, Madam Speaker, I've received many petitions , many very sincere and very concerned letters and phone calls to my office.

The overwhelming majority of those subm iss io ns to my office and to me have be en supportive of the decision of this Legislature in enacting Bill 7. I could read into the record many of the letters that I've received , but choos e not to do so. I don't want to take undue time in respect to this matter , but just to indicate to colleagues in the House that I was very impressed with the concerns of people who took time to draft them, and they were obviously not form letters .

They were individual thoughts and concerns that citizens of Manitoba wanted to register with me, the government in this Legislature , in respect to this issue. I'm very pleased with the extent of those concerns and the care and time that was taken by people to put their views on the record. Madam Speaker, I also want to put on the reco rd, very briefly, that a number of organizations have taken stands. I've had letters representative of church groups and others in society. I've consulted with a number of organizations , including the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce who passed a resolution supportive of Bill 7.

The Manitoba Association of Urban Municipalities passed a resolution also supporting that one day in seven, store operations be closed. I was also heartened to read, although I didn 't receive a letter from this organization , in the Sears Canada Incorporated Annual Report of 1986 , a very toughly worded message in respect to their position in respect to opening their stores on Sundays. And I read from page 2 of their annual report , Madam Speaker, and of course this is a report to shareholders , and it's therefore worded in a personal vein : " Your company has always opposed Sunda y shopping.

During 1986, an increasing number of retailers decided to open their stores on Sunday, even though the laws in a number of provinces made such action illegal. The situation escalated and, early in December, several major retail chains announced they too would break the law and opened their Ontario stores on Sunday . Sears decided to go against this tide and declared we would remain closed in Ontario. The Supreme Court of Canada, in its decision of December 18, 1986 , upheld the validity of the Ontario Business Holidays Act.

As a result, most retailers operating in provinces with similar legislation closed their doors on Sunday. "Unfortunately, the current legislation has a number of inequities and attempts will likely be made to change it.

Sears will maintain its strong opposition to any attempt to make Sunday an open-shopping day across Canada because we firmly believe that being open six days and several nights provides convenient shopping hours for our retail customers, and that Sunday openings have a negative impact on the quality of life of our employees and the level of service to our customers ." Madam Speaker, I thought that was a very vigorous and very sensible pronouncement on the part of a very major retail corporation in Canada. The extent of their operations is outlined ih the annual report and it is quite impresssive.

I also would like to put on the record that, as I've indicated in the House on a number of other occasions , my concern and I think the concern of society, is that we as society, with all of the technological improvements and advances that we have made, ought to be able to 2193

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 shar e in having greater leisure time , rather than men and women and families being divided and being compelled to spend more and more of their time earning their daily bread. We should , with all of the technolog _ical advance that we have made as society, be able to work fewer hours and have much more time for leisure , much more time to not only pass roses by but actually stop , enjoy the beauty of the roses and smell them .

Madam Speake r, statist ics developed by, I believe this was Statistics Canada , Labour Force , Statistics Canada, indicate that over the course of the years 1983 to 1986 , more and more people are working longer hours. For example in 1983 , 19.2 percent of those people employed in Canada worked 41 hours or more . But in 1986, that figure had gone up to 21 .1 per'cent. So instead of our sophisticated society providing more leisure time, workers are working longer hours .

That is a concern, I think, that we all must share, that we should be developing a society where there sho uld be more opportunities for leisure , more opportunity for families to follow individual family pursuits, whether they be in the form of an active recreational pursuit or a passive one. Madam Speaker , I could speak at great length in respect to the concerns of Manitobans that have been evidenced to me through their letters, by their petitions, by their telephone calls.

But I confine my remarks to those that I've made, indicating that I believe a broad consensus of the citizens of Manitoba feel that , while there are some limited gains for some people if we had a more commercial week - that is, the commercial enterprises could be opened seven days a week - the vast maj ority of the people of Manitoba say no, we want to have a society where there is more opportunity for family recreati on. We recognize that some people have to work, and your legislation should provide for the necessities of life that are available on Sundays. Our legislation does provide for that.

There is ample opportunity . It's been estimated that someone who wants to buy groceries can shop 58 hours a week to buy groceries - that is from the larger retail stores. If they want to buy groceries from a convenience store, they can buy those groceries 24 hours a day, seven days a week . So there is no limitation , there is no frustration of the needs of people . There is a concern that our society not slide away from one which cherishes family living and family opportunities to recreate and socialize, to commune with nature and commune with one another.

So it is, I believe, with the wholehearted support of the vast majority of the people of Manitoba, that I commend this legislation to you. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. G. FILMON: Yes, I wonder if the Minister would permit a question, Madam Speaker .- (lnterjection) Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question for the Minister involves the limitation of four employees on a Sunday in retail stores that will rema in open .

Since there is no definition of what type of employee is included in that number, I wonder if the Minister could indicate whether or not it's intended to have security personnel included within that limitation of four. HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, that is a good question . The Independe nt Retailers, when they met with me, indicated a concern in respect to that. I'd indicated my

interpretation would have been that they would have been included, but it's my understanding that the officials who had drafted the legislation and officials who have been interpreting the existing legislation do not feel that four, that number four, would be inclusive of security personnel. I don't know whether that is any formidable problem bec ause, so long as the people who are in the store are not eng aged in the sale - the retail opera tion of the store - I don't think that it will constitut e a problem.

And of course , that will have to be determin ed, should there be any prosecution brought under the act to establish whether or not those people actually were involved in facilitating the sales. If it's just a security operation, then I don't think it expands the capacity of the operation inordinately . MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker - and I don't wish to enter into debate - I am going to conclude with a question for the Minister but , given that the security personnel essentially permit a very large operation to remain open to serve the public , would it not be possible for those who draft the legislation to put it in such a form that security personnel could be included within the definition that is intended of the number of four? HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speaker, it is my intent to hear submissions at committee, the concerns and the arguments that are advanced in respect to the numbers that are in the act .

I've heard representation , heard some concern that perhaps the number should be five. Ontario used three in part of their legislation . I think four is the right number . I will certainly, and colleagues will hear representations at the committee. If there is a will to make any alteration, of course that could be considered at committee. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker , is it in order to speak on this bill at this particular time? MADAM SPEAKER: Yes. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker, I'd like to make it perfectly clear that I support what I think to be the objectives of this particular bill , which is to provide individuals in our society with a pause day or a Sunday or Saturday off so that they can be with their family to go to church if that is what they choose to do with their leisure time, and certainly many Manitobans choose to do that , to spend a day in recreational pursuits with their children and with their family members .

And on the 25th of February , I was greeted with an emergency phone call from the Premier's Office stating that it was most important that we move with all due speed on this particular Bill No. 7, which Bill No. 32 replaces , because if we allowed a situation to exist where Canada Safeway was allowed to open and other 2194

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 superstores were allowed to ope n, then we would have set a very dangerous preced ent and we would not be allowed to go backwards. One of the issue s which I raised at that time and which precipitated Bill No. 7 being translated into Bill No. 32 was the fact that I did not think Bill No. 7 would , in fact , prevent Safeway from remaining open on Sundays. And that is exactly what has happened . Safeway has indeed remained open in their smalle r store units .

So we have , in fact, forced any number of people to be at work on Sunday and have denied them the opportunity to have those leisure hours with their families . I question, therefore, what Bill 32 is in fact all about. If it isn 't going to prevent large corporations in this city from rema ining open, what is it designed to do? Stop some, but not others? We are, I think , developing a piece of legisla tion with a great number of inequities .

If we, for example, allow a large multinational corporation to remain open with four employees and with severa l security guards , does that not , in fact , violate the principles of this legislation? So what are the principles of this legislation? Firstly, are we trying to protect the Mom and Pop operations , those small stores which are operated by family members and which frequently operate 24 hours a day or 18 hours a day?

But those individual operations , Madam Speaker , are in far greater danger from ? Eleven's and from other type of franchise convenience stores, statistics would have us believe, than they are from the larger stores, because they draw business from the small family operation. We are not doing anything in this legislation to stop a ?-Eleven with $7.5 billion dollar sales in North America in the last year from remaining open 24 hours a day and 24 hours on Sunday . Perhaps we are supposed to be protecting the small stores in the rural communities by this legislation .

That is a reasonable objective and , indeed, a good objective. But if that is what we are trying to do with this legislation, Madam Speaker , why are we not forbidding th e Safeway's from remaining open on Sunday, because those rural dwellers will be equally attracted to drive in to shop at a Safeway, as they will be to drive in and to shop at any other large grocery retail outlet in the City of Winn ipeg . Are we dedicated to preserving the family? Is that the purpose of this legislation?

Well obviously not, if we are now going to allow 24-hour convenience stores to remain open with six employees, and we are again going to allow any store that, because of size, can manage to remain open with four employees to so do. Are we trying to protect the workers with this legislation?

Well, the interesting thing here is, we are perhaps going to protect unionized workers , because the unionized workers can gather together and they can get a contract that says, I want to have an opt out provision for Sunday, and so the Canada Safeway employees may end up being protected because they can say, we want this in our collective bargaining agreement , and therefore we will go after it and get it . But where is the protection for the worker who works in the ?-Eleven, or who works in the Mac's Milk, or indeed works in the other small , non-franch ised operations in Manitoba?

What have we accomplished in this legis lation, Bill No. 32, that makes it better than Bill No. 7? The answer is, Mada m Speak er, absolu tely nothing. There is nothing in this legislation which will make it a more family day in Manitoba. There is nothing in this legisl ation which will protect the non-union worker. There is nothing in th is legislation which will encourage more leisure time, and to reverse the statistics that the Minister used, which said that we have gone from 19.5 percent of the population working 41.5 hours or more to 21 .1 percent. Nothing in that legislation will do this .

Why did this Minister not have the courage to make this legislation tougher? Why did he lack the fores ight to make sure that this legislation, in fact, kept all but the very small family operations open on Sund ay? I hope throughout this debate, Mad am Speaker, that we will not pay merely lip service to Bill No. 32 as just another Bill No. 7, but we will seriously exa mine what this bill is going to do to the family in our society. I think that what we have done is open the door to further erosion of the family and a family day in the Province of Man itoba. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. G.

DUCHARME: Yes, thank you Madam Speaker . I move, seconded by the Member for Portage la Prairie, that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 25 - THE DISCRIMINATORY BUSINESS PRACTICES ACT HON. R. PENNER presented Bill No. 25, Th e Discriminatory Business Practices Act ;

Loi sur les pratiques de commerce discriminatoires , for Second Reading . MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-Gene ral. HON. R. PENNER: Thank you Madam Speaker . I will not be long in introducing the bill, although I think the bill is of considerable importance. Members, I think, will have no difficulty recalling the background to this bill during the last Session when questions were being raised about a subsidiary of the Manitoba Telephone System , namely MTX, wh ich was then doing business in a number of locations , including among others Saud i Arabia.

One of the quest ions of concern to both sides of the House , clearly, was the suggestion that either directly or indirectly - and I don't suppose it matters which - we may have been parties to discr imination against women and Jews, because the suggestion was that a third party, in this case a Third World country , in the operation of its laws effected certain requirements in the granting of visas that it might have - although there was no specific case , it was noted - but nevertheles s that it might have prevented women or Jews from even applying for jobs because of the suggestion that the visa requirements would prevent them taking such jobs in any event . 2195

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 At tha t time, the Premier explicitly in this House undertook to have a look at what might be done . In the course of doing so, we were referred to and looked at the On tario act, a somewhat similar name, looked at other experiences in some American ju risdict ions, had the matter referred to as one of the mandates for Coopers and Lybrand, and was discussed at some length by Peter Cummings in his report on that particular issue for Coopers and Lybrand.

It's in the result of th is and, may I say, in discussions that I've had with members of affected communities, repre sentat ives of the B'Nai B'Rith Anti-Defamation League, and others, that this bill is now brought forward. I'm proud to be able to bring it forward , and to recommend it to the House . The act proh ibits, Madam Speaker, certain business practices which would otherw ise result in discrimination on the basis of race, creed, colour , nationality , ancestry , place of origin, sex or geographical location. Its target is made quite specific.

It is specifically those forms of disc rimination which arise in the context of secondary or tertiary boycotts . As such, the legislation does not supplant existing human rights legislation, but is meant to complement it in a particular sphere and to deal with a particular problem.

The bill is modelled conceptually , as I say, upon On ta rio 's Discriminato ry Business Practices Act , although there are some substantive differences and one major procedural difference, namely, unlike the Ontario legislation which has a separate means of administration and enforcement, this legislation will primarily be administered through the machinery and by the personnel of the Manitoba Human Rights Commiss ion.

We took that path, Madam Speaker , after ensuring ourselves by reference to the Ontario experience , and indeed some of my officials went down to discuss the operation of the legislation with people in Ontario. We were satisfied that we didn ' t need a whole new expensive bureau cracy to deal with that particular prob lem, that we had a commission in place and employees in place who were very much aware of discrimin ator y practices and the way in which they operated, and that it would be sufficient to have the Human Rights Commission and officers in the commission be the operative agents of this legislation.

The principle behind the legislation is straightforward and essentially no different from that expressed in Ontario when Premi er Davidson , speaking to the legislation, stated , and I quote: " It is an expression, hopefully, by this Legislature and by all of its members, of our opposition to a policy or policies created other than in our own country which has an impact of a discriminatory nature on citizens of the province ." A sentiment echoed by the then-Leader of the Opposi tion who stated, and again I quote: "We believe the community wants the legislation to express as a matter of principle, and by statute, that it does not believe that international agreements and confrontations should be allowed to impose themselves in our community." The legislation then seeks to protect Manitobans - I hope it will protect Manitobans - from the effects of secondary and tertiary boycotts by prohibiting certain types of conduct known as discriminatory business practices, doing this by prohibiting the compilation, for exampl e, of designated info rmation which can be used by others to discriminate against Manitobans, by setting up a registration system wherein businesses will be expect ed to report to the registrar any attempt to induce them to commit discriminatory business practices, and by a broad enforcement process.

I'll make some reference to that in a few moments . The definition of a prohibited discriminatory business practice may seem cumbersome at first glance - the bill, I will admit , is not an easy one to read - but reflects the difficulty in attempting to grapple with such phenomena as secondary or tertiary boyco tts , wh ile not impairing the long-recognized rights of individual citizens, as well as states, to initiate boycotts as a means of expressing or furthering their beliefs. To the extent that a primary boycott is based on discriminatory criteria, it will be dealt with via The Human Rights Act .

I just pause here to note, Madam Speaker , that should it be, for example , an instrument of state policy by the Government of Canada, which is charged with External Affairs , that no business shall be conducted with, let's say, South Africa , then that expression of state policy would obviously supersede , in this case, complement anything in this act. The system for reporting requests that individuals or businesses participate in acts violating this legislation is simple, but nevertheless one of the most important features of the bill.

This is not just because an entity which must reveal publicly such an approach is less likely to be induced to violate the legislation but most importantly , Madam Speaker, the Ontario experience shows that frequently when businesses about to enter into a contract to do business externally can point to legislation of this type as the basis for a referral to cooperate with such requests, the initiating state, the state which in effect is saying, hey, we won't allow this kind of person or that kind of person to come in, will frequently drop the discriminatory requirement altogether if they're seriously desirous of doing business with a domestic company .

Generally, the administration and enforcement of the legislation is in the hands of the director who is, as I've pointed out , the executive director of the Human Rights Commission. The director may receive and investigate complaints alleging breaches of the legislation, or may investigate apparent breaches even in the absence of a formal complaint .

But obviously, where there is some evidence brought to the attention of the director in an informal way where there appears to have been a breach, there is then a process whereby the director may make an order requiring the contravention to be discontinued and/or remedied in some other fashion . Here, too, Madam Speaker, modelling the proposed practice along the lines used in the human rights field itself, every effort will be made to resolve issues of that kind on an informal basis. That usually works .

It does in the human rights field , and it will in this specialized application of anti-discrimination principles. Where, however , a company or business disagrees with the director 's assessment of the situation, the director is required to attempt to mediate the situation and, if no agreement is reached between any of the affected parties on an appropriate and acceptable course of action, the matter is then and only then referred to a Board of Adj udication appointed in the same fashion as under The Human Rights Act. 2196

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 All inter est ed parties have a right to appear before the adjudicator , who is charged , subject to certain rights of judicial rev iew, with determ ining whether or not the legislation has been breached and, if so , the appropria te remedy. A person who has been harmed by breaches of legislation is, in the alternative, entitled to commence a private action for the recovery of damages, including punitive damages, if applicable .

Attention should be drawn to a new remedy designed to moderate within the lim its of provinc ial legislative competence - and let me just go up an alley here for a moment. One of the reasons why the act appears somewhat convoluted is we've had to try to enact within our provincial legislative competence , so designed to moderate within the limits of provincial competence the negative effects upon employees or prospective employees of a discriminatory entry requirement adopted by some states.

In those situations where an employee or a prospective employee is denied the right to participate in an employment opportunity in another country because that state discriminates based upon an employee's attributes as defined in the legislation, the employer will still be allowed to conduct business in a di scriminatory state but must take reasonable steps to make the next comparable employment opportunity available to the victimized employee.

Finally, and in addition to other remedies provided by the legislation, there is provision for the possible suspension of a business's right to participate in government contracts in the event of a breach of the act . Madam Speaker, I'm sure that this bill will require some discussion in committee, some debate in the House, but I'm sure also that it will be heartily endorsed by all members of this House as a step in the right direction. MR. G. MERCIER: Just a question for clarification, Madam Speaker . The bill in

section 2(bXii) refers to the fact that the act may not apply to discriminatory practices in accordance with "a policy of the government of Manitoba directed towards persons in provinces other than Man itoba." Does the government have any such discriminatory practices now? HON. R. PENNER: I'm sorry. There was a bit of a rumble just behind the member . I wonder if the member would repeat the question. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . The Honourable Member for St. Norbert . MR. G. MERCIER: Just a question for clarification, Madam Speaker, to the Attorney -General.

Section 2 refers to the non-application of the act in regard to a discriminatory business practice that is in accordance with the policy of the Government of Manitoba directed towards persons in provinces other than Manitoba . My question to the Attorney-General is: Does Manitoba have such discriminatory business practices existing now? HON. R. PENNER: Well, yes, we do. We have , in fact , a discriminatory business practice with respect to South Afr ica in terms of the purchase of South African liquo r. That's the kind of thing tha t is referred to there .

So th at if, in fact - and I just use that as an example - the Government of Manitob a, as a matter of provincial state policy to the extent that it can within its jurisdictions say that we, as a government, sha ll not do this , then anyone who conforms in their own practic e to what the government is doi ng as part of its practice would not be in breach of the act. MR. G. MERCIER: Yes, Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Membe r for Arthur , that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 33 - THE REGISTRY ACT HON. R. PENNER presented Bill No. 33,

An Act to amend The Registry Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur l'enregistrement fancier , for Second Reading. MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Madam Speaker, I hope the members opposite, particularly the Member for St. Norbert, will forgive me in introducing the bills in the numerical sequence that we have because, in fact , Bill 33 is a complementary piece to Bill 34. But perhap s I can, because they are both very technical, in a matte r of one minute explain both bills to the House.

The act , which I wil l introduce formally in a few moments to amend The Real Property Act, is of a houseke eping and clean-up nature following the major changes that were made to The Real Property Act at the last Session. It simply provides authority , as does

An Act to amend the Registry Act, because land in Manitoba, Madam Speaker , may be under The Real Property Act or under The Registry Act. There is still some "old system lan d," as it is called , that is still under The Registry Act. Basically , we passed certain legislation in this House in the last Session amending The Real Property Act , and now we have to do certain things of a technical nature that are consequential on that which we did with much understanding and enthusiasm in the last Session.

So both bills are, as I say, of a housekeeping and clean-up nature following the major changes made to The Real Property Act in the last Session. The most important change applicable in both instances is the authority to destroy Land Title documents immediately after microfilming, rather than retaining the originals for various terms of years. Once we have them microfilmed and the microfilms are very carefully secured , then the microfilm record will be used and recognized in the courts as valid evidence for all purposes . Another

section of the amending bill under The Real Property Act deals with the technical question of the effect of tax sales on pipeline easements, right-of-way agreements, caveats relating to zoning and development agreements. Again , we are going to allow the acceptance of certain copies of such agreements for registration in a deposit 2197

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 register without production of the original document when the copy has been authenticated by a reliable source suc h as another government or a notary. The power to make regulations under The Real Property Act formally appeared in two widely separated sections. They will be consolidated. Bill 33, in short, is a companion to those changes and provides the same sort of sequence with respect to the use of documents authenticated by a reliable source, as I have said, such as government, may be registered without production of the original.

Again, we will provide in Bill 33 under The Registry Act that documents may be destroyed immediately if they have been microfilmed without waiting any particular length of time. Finally, with respect to Bill 33, it completes the abolition of any need to continue the use of a Registrar' s Seal of Office in any Land Registry office, so they are technical but important bills nevertheless. MR. G. MERCIER: The question that may relate to this and the next bill, Madam Speaker, what happens if the microfilm is destroyed? HON. R.

PENNER: I suppose that the same question might well be made if the original document is destroyed and that has happened, and extraordinary steps were needed by staff over a period of time to reconstruct the sequence and to establish the authenticity of a particular document. Fortunately , what is happening that will render that kind of difficult process less necessary is we are computerizing . We expect to have the main titled books computerized . I think we've got about two years in which that will happen .

At that time, of course, the records will have been both on microfilm, which incidentally are stored every night in fireproof vaults , which is easier to do. You can 't store all of the titled books in fireproof vaults. There 's just no capacity for doing that, and we'll have as a companion or backup to that the primary source of information which will be on software of some kind or another, perhaps really floppy disks. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I move , seconded by t he Member for Assiniboia, that debate be adjourned . MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 34 - THE REAL PROPERTY ACT HON. R.

PENNER presented Bill No. 34,

An Act to amend The Real Property Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens reels, for Second Reading . MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Madam Speaker, I've already spoken to this bill in introducing the previous bill, an unusual practice I will admit, but it does save time . MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, I move , seconded by the Member for Assiniboia , that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. . BILL No. 35 - THE CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES ACT HON. M. SMITH presented Bill No. 35,

An Act to amend The Child and Family Services Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les services a l'enfant et a la famille , for Second Reading . MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister . HON. M. SMITH : Madam Speaker , I would like to introduce proposed changes in The Child and Family Services Act. The proposed revisions will clarify and update certain sections of the legislation , and provide consistency with other federal and provincial statutes . I'm proposing a change to ensure that Status Indian children are registered under The Indian Act , regardless of band membership. This revision would be consistent with the current wording of the federal Indian Act. I'm also proposing changes in the adoption

section of the act that would make it possible for the courts to waive the time limits when an extended family applies for adoption. The present legislation requires such applications to be made within 12 months of placement, or after three years of continuous care of the child . There are proposed changes dealing with administrative documents , which would make the processes consistent with provincial regulations and the federal Divorce Act.

I am also proposing that the Director of Child and Family Services be given the legal power to authorize a search of the records of former wards who have reached 18 years of age for information which may enable reunion of adult adoptee's siblings. Madam Speaker, I believe the changes I have proposed will update existing legislation and provide improved service to the children and families of Manitoba. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Assiniboia. MR. R.

NORDMAN: Madam Speaker , I move , seconded by the Member for Arthur, that debate be adjourned, but in the name of the Member for Rhineland . (lnterjection)- Okay, just for myself . That's fine . MOTION presented and carried. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SECOND READING MADAM SPEAKER: On the adjourned debate on Second Reading , Bill No. 6, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Stand. MADAM SPEAKER: Agreed? (Agreed) On the adjourned debate of the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, Bill No. 15, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Virden. 2198

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 MR. G. FINDLAY: Stand . MADAM SPEAKER: Agreed? (Agreed) On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Highways and Transportation , Bill No. 23, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Minnedosa. A MEMBER: Stand . MADAM SPEAKER: Stand? On the proposed motion of the Honourab le Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs , Bill No. 24, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Emerson . A MEMBER: Stand.

BILL NO. 27 - THE REAL PROPERTY ACT AND VARIOUS OTHER ACTS AMENDMENT ACT MADAM SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney-General , No. 27, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker , just briefly, this bill has been under discussion by many interested people with the Attorney-General's Department for the last two or three months , and has been subject to a great deal of consultation, even with respect to the final draft.

We are therefore prepared at this stage, because of some urgency in dealing with this matter , to have it passed today and proceed to committee as quickly as possible . QUESTION put, MOTION carried. MADAM SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of the Environment, Bill No. 28, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Emerson. A MEMBER : Stand. MADAM SPEAKER: Stand? On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Housing , Bill No. 29, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Assiniboia. A MEMBER: Stand .

MADAM SPEAKER: Stand? (Agreed) On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Community Services , Bill No. 31 , standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Rhineland. Stand? That's it. The Honourable Government House Leader . HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker , I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture , that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itse lf into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Sup ply to be grant ed to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Community Services ; and th e Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet in the Chair for the Department of the Attorney-General •. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ATTORNEY-GENERAL MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Baker: Committee, come to order . We'll start the proceedings with a statement by the Minister . The Honourable Minister. HON. R.

PENNER: If you 'd just bear with me for a minute , my deputy will be back in a moment with the notes . MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll recess until the deputy gets back? HON. R. PENNER: No, I think we'll start. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, I'd like to make a brief opening statement. The Department of the Attorney-General, as members of this committee will know, is primarily responsible for the integrity and one hopes, from time to time, improvements of the justice system in Manitoba. The rule of law protects the lives of all Manitobans.

Indeed, if I can be parenthetical for a moment , I don 't think a democratic society can exist without the rule of law. In our society , there is a tendency for us to take justice for granted, until the time comes when we come into direct contact with the system. As we know, in one way or another, increasing numbers of people are coming into direct contact with the system, sometimes positively, most often negatively, when, for example, they are the victims of crime .

So that contact may arise as a victim of crime, an accused, a witness, a party to a legal transaction such as the selling of a house or in a lawsuit. When, as individuals , we come face to face with our justice system , we expect that the system will be accessible and that the response will be swift and, above all, impartial. Meeting these expectations is the challenge of the various components of the department.

We are now , as was the case in the last two Estimates, organized into six major divisions and, within those divisions, we deliver dozens of individual programs involving literally thousands of people, both in and outside the department . Just again, parenthetically, one of the programs that's delivered - albeit by an arm 's length agency - Legal Aid Manitoba serves, in that program alone , some 65,000 Manitobans each year. Of course, the court system serves, one way or another, even greater numbers than that.

Continuing increase in the crime rate - and we've spoken about that in the House - and greater involvement of law enforcement in the courts in such areas as spousal abuse and impaired driving has increased the volume of cases going through Manitob a courts. Those are some of the activities that we have to be able to respond to . 2199

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 There has also been a rise in the number and complexity of commercial fraud investigations and prosecutions. One particular investigation now under way is expected to involve resources of the RCMP, even outside resource s, for a period of an additional two years, and it's already been under way for about a year. So here too there are great demands being placed on the system.

Information received from commercial crime officers, both in the department and in the RCMP, indicate that this represents a t rend towards more crimin al commercial activity, rather than a tempo rary increase, and that's regrettable of course . Yet we have to be ready to deal with that and , because of its very complexity, it places very great demands on the system. Economic recovery , a good thing in itself of course , has resulted in record volumes in land titles registrations and personal property registrations and substantial increases in the number of civil cases coming before the courts.

Revenues , for example, cou rt revenues , land titles revenues, have also increased to record levels . For the next two years, as we had originally anticipated, the number of divorces is expected to increase dramatically as a result of the federal legislation on divorce proclaimed June 1, 1986 . With only seven months since the proclamation of that legislation - it's now little more th an seven months - 1986 has had an increase of 43 percent in divorce petitions over 1985. We anticipated that, and we retained some term staff to deal with it.

We knew that there would be a substantial blip , but ulti mately it will level out. So, additional resources have been added to deal with these increases on the civil side . In order to deal with them, in addition to having some added term staff, we have reallocated personnel within several programs to deal with the situation. So dealing effectively with such increased demands on departmental programs and still maintaining acceptable levels of service , particularly in response time and during a per iod of restraint, represents a major challenge to the department, but one which I think we are meeting.

Just brie fly on the issue of constitutional compliance , and here too there's been both a qualitative and a quantitative change, qualitative in the sense that we now have a special unit dealing with the complex issues of constitutional compliance, which hitherto were primar ily matters of dealing with questions of legislative jurisdiction as between the Federal Government and ourselves, but now has to deal with all the complexities of the Charter of Rights and Liberties and its impact, both in the c ivil and the criminal field .

Now the Constitutional Law Branch, added to the department in'85-86 , has added a new dimension to the department and ensures, we believe, the ability of the province to deal effectively with increased workload in the area. Charter compliance has been and continues to be a priority issue with the department . We have , as I indicated in response to some questions in the House earlier this week , introduced significant legislati on in each of the last two Sessions to amend sections of our existing laws, which may offend sections of the Charter.

In many instances, let me say, we are doing this in an anticipatory way. I suppose that one way of dealing with the Charter is to say, oh well, let's wait until we're taken to court. In some instances, we think that may be appropriate; in most , it's not. Some sections of our Statutes are clearly - in our view and in the view of people within the Constitutional Law Bran ch - not in compliance with the Charter and , wh ere we can reasonably in a staged way make those changes, we ought to do it and we are doing it.

We've also initiated constitutio nal references to the Court of Appeal in several areas, for example , the right of a young offender to retain his or her own counsel. That's become a major problem for law enforcement there. We hope , incidentally, to have the law in this area clarified very soon. Language obligations under The Public Schools Act has been a question of uncertainty , becaus e of the ambiguity in language of

section 23 of the Charter and, rather than go through long , expensive and dilatory court proceedings as was the case in both Alberta and Ontario - and those cases aren't completed by a long shot - we have a reference to the Court of Appeal to see if we can determine the nature of our obligations . The validity of anti-soliciting legislation , because of a particular judgment of a judge of the Provincial Court , rather than leave our law enforcement agencies , police and prosecutors in a state of uncertainty , we've referred that directly to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has heard argument.

The matter is in reserve. We expect a decision some time in the near future , in that way to assist us in determining the extent to which in this area and other references will help to determine the extent to which generally new constitutional obligations will require changes in law and practice . I should indicate here again , parenthetically, that we are, I think, using our resources in this area in a measured and judicious way when we're aware of challenges that have been made based on the Charter to parallel legislation .

We may wait for the outcome of such challenges rather than initiate a reference directly within the jurisdiction here , making thereby the best use not only of our own but of other available resources. A major challenge to the department has been the validation of Manitoba's laws through the careful examination, translation, reenactment and publication of our laws in English and French languages. The reenactment process is progressing ahead of schedule, demonstrated by the tabling earlier in this Session of Bill 4.

In effect , I should say when Bill 4 is dealt with, there will be, of the revised Statutes of Manitoba, the main public statutes, only less than 40 bills to deal with. Also progressing well is the review and reenactment of all current regulations by the Regulations Unit of the Legal Services Branch. This is a new unit . It's a unit that's been involved in the establishment of an electronic data base to simplify future review and maintenance of regulations , as well as advising on the preparation of new regulations .

This fits in well with the ongoing responsibility of this branch to provide client departments with top quality legal services, ranging from the conduct of litigation , providing legal advice and opinions , to preparing contracts and other documents . I should add here , with respect to the regulation unit, that we hope to in a sense reduce the number of regulations, a lot of technical stuff as appeared in regulations which need not necessarily be in the 2200

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 regulations. We hope to organize them better and use a more systematic way of organizing the regulations and . as I've indicated , by getting the basic regul ation into an electronic data base then, when changes have to be made as they do with regulations from time to time, the whole production of the new regulation can be expedited.

There are, of course , within the system, certain special justice needs that demand a special group such as victims of crime, women, Natives, the elderly and the young are being addressed, I hope creatively and I hope effectively , but certainly we are paying attention to these special needs. Overall , these efforts have resulted in considerable financial support from the Federal Government and have been accomplished within our presently limited resources.

I would like to note here that there is a very good relationship between this department and the Federal Department of Justice , and we work cooperatively in a whole number of areas . Family Law in Manitoba has long been noted for its leadership in this area. Our departmen t's Family Law programs have been singularly successful, not only in terms of the quality of service rendered , but even with respect to returns to the province in terms of direct revenue, reduced welfare rolls serving as key indicators .

The department has now begun a consultative process with concerned groups concerning changes designed to keep our Family Law both current and in the vanguard of. Canadian Family Law reform . A White Paper is now being prepared for introduction before the end of the current Session . As members know, this was preceded by a discussion paper, which has been given wide circulation. Responses have come in, are being analyzed and, before the end of the Session, I hope to be able to table a White Paper which will be the basis of legislation in the next Session.

So we hope to have the resulting legislative package ready to table later this year or early in the following year. Maintenance Enforcement , very briefly, as promised last year, the Maintenance Enforcement Program has worked with rural courts to ensure that the standards of enforcement in rural Manitoba are consistent with the standard provided in urban areas. This is being provided through a rural liaison officer to coordinate rural enforcement , a rural legal officer to provide legal services to our rural enforcement offices and additional enforcement resources, where required , outside of Winnipeg.

In order to ensure a province-wide standard of service, direct computer access to program account records in each judicial district will be dealt with after a current review of the program's total computer requirements is completed. I just finally add in this

section that provincial preparations for implementation of the Federal Enforcement Assistance Act are now complete. Legal Aid, three significant changes to Manitoba's Legal Aid plan were announced in July of '86. Financial eligibility guidelines were increased to reflect current income levels set by Stats Canada. Tariff of fees in the area of Family Law practice was revised to better reflect the current practice of the Family Division of the Court of Queen's Bench, emphasizing mediation and conciliation rather than court confrontations .

Finally it was decided to increase the basic hourly rate payable to private practitioners taking legal aid 2201 cases in three annual steps to reach a level more in line with the increased cost of law practice . While , as known, the second of the three annual steps has been delayed six months , it nevertheless will be going into effect in this fiscal year and the Basic Fee Enhancement Plan is still in place .

Fortunately, a new federal-provincial, two-year cost sharing agreement for cri minal legal aid retroactive to April 1, 1985 was announced in January , providi ng for a revised formula for adult criminal legal aid in respect to 1985-86 and 1986-87 , and an extension of the cost sharing formula for Young Offenders legal aid to cover the provincial expenditures incurred in 1986-87. Negotiations continue for the future . I believe that there's an extension of that agreement for at least an additional year. Victims of crime, members are already aware of the legislation in this area and of the legislation.

I might add here certain remarks of the Ontario Attorney General to the contrary. The program, albeit operating within a limited base because it's applicable at the moment in terms of the surcharge to provincial offences , has already produced substantial revenue and the committee, the Justice for Victims of Crime Board , will I think shortly be announcing its first grants under the program . Members may recall that we added a 12 percent surcharge and , at the appropriate time, I can provide anyone who's interested and the committee exact figures of what has been realized to date.

It's approaching $100,000 , and the exact figure can be given. The Victim 's Assistance Committee was named at the beginning of '87 as headed by Steve Brickey , sociologist with the University of Manitoba. It's developing its policies and procedures and, as I indicated, will be making recommendations to the Attorney-General regarding the use of the fund and other recommendations in the very near future.

The evaluation of two pilot projects cost shared with the Federal Government relating to the treatment of victims of crime - that is the Victim Impact Statement Project - and the videotaping of child witnesses , is now proceeding . We look forward to the resul ts in order to improve these programs . Again, I might ju st add here that all of these issues I've just referred to will be on the agenda of a meeting next week in New Brunswick of all Attorneys-General and the Minister of Justice.

Northern justice initiatives, as a result of a number of meetings held in the fall of '86 with leaders from northern communities and reserve communities, we made a number of proposals to begin to address the needs and concerns of Northern Manitoba . Thompson has been enhanced; it's a judicial centre. A full-time sheriff has been appointed , and decision making and management will be provided on a local level for the 20-odd areas which we service out of Thompson.

An additional Crown Attorney based in The Pas will be provided for the North, eliminating the need for an attorney to communicate between Winnipeg and the North, and ensuring that cases are dealt with promptly . I believe that new attorney will be in place by the 1st of June . An additional court communicator will be added in Thompson to work with northern communities. The purpose of this program, cost shared with the Federal Government, is to assist Native people involved in the

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 cri mi nal c ou rt p rocess with guidance and direction in adoptin g the best course of action . As I indicated in the House today, we have a review of the effect iveness of the Court CommuniC6tor 's Progr am, a nd I hope to be in a position to table that report in the very near future . We've also added another permanent staff lawyer to Legal Aid in Thompson, because we know that the lack of a dequ ate legal aid resources has been one of the fact ors occas ioning some delay for the circuit court and we want to be a ble to eliminate such delay s.

A two-year pilot project, cost-shared with the Federal Departmen t of Justice, utilizes legal aid paralegals , and has been introduced on a trial basis in Shamattawa, Cros s Lake, Norway House and God 's Lake Narrows. The paralegals will be based in Thompson and will both improve existing duty counsel services and provide services new to northern communities , such as drop in legal advi ce, info rmation clinics , assistance on how to o rganize and incorporate resource people for com munity boards and things of that kind.

Additional Native Justices of the Peace are being recruited and trained, both to increase the involvement of Natives in the justice system and to avoid situations where accused people are taken off the reserve, becaus e no one in the community can hear bail applications or other docket matters such as remands and things of that sort. We are going to develop and deliver a number of workshops for the Native northern remote and reserve communit ies on the functioning of the criminal justice system . These will be offered on a systematic basis in northern communities .

Just a word about the Law Foundation, that was created in '86 by way of legislation . It'll shortly be tabled in the Hous e, some legislation of a technical kind to amend certain features of the foundation but, subject to tha t, it's existing and well. Funding for the foundation is p ro vided from the interest paid on lawyers ' clients' trus t a ccou nts in the province .

As I indic ate d last time, we were able to negotiate new arrang ements with financial institutions , and that's fortu nate because there has been, as we all know, quite a d rop in interest rates and a drop in prime, which is the bas is o f t he formul a for the payment of interest on lawyers' trust accounts. But despite that, the new arrangeme nts have enabled the foundation to anticipate reven ues of well over $2 million, a very considerable increase over the four-year, five-year average , in terms of the availability of that kind of money.

Operations of the foundation are directed by a board, headed by Jack Lond on of the Faculty of Law. New Init iatives, just a few closing remarks, I've already introdu ced in this Session of the Legislature a b ill to establis h the Crime Prevention Centre , The Crime Prevention Foundation Act, effecti ve ways of preventing cri me which concerns everyone today . Increasing crime rates, the citizen s' growing fear that they will become vict ims, and an expand ing public awareness of crime related issues has led to an explosion of activity by many agencies and community groups.

These agencies and groups share similar goals, but they approach them in a variety of ways, resulting in an urgent need for some coordination and ratio nalization whic h will maintain the range of creativi ty offere d by t he independent groups while preventing costly duplication and programmi ng and services . To this end, in line with a promis e made during the '86 election campaign , my department 's preparing crime prevention legislation and th at h as been introduc ed, but it will be the focal point for the coordination of crime prevention programs.

Expansion of the Family Court, a study has been done on various ways that we might expand the Unified Family Court of the Court of Queen 's Bench throughou t the province. This is now under active review. Certainly the evaluation of the Family Divison has confirmed the effect iveness of the approach in providing a more effi cient streamlined service to mar riages in troub le by reducing the adversarial aspec ts o f f amily disputes through such procedures as pretrials and mediation . It reduces the pain, the bitterness , the confusion experienced by the people involved.

We're following up on recommendations of the report. I conclude these opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, by acknowledging the challenges we face in the next few years to provide not merely the perception but the reality of increased accessibility to the justice system in an environment of restraint , but nevertheless responding, we hope creat ively, innovatively, to the new demands. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, the Attorney-General raises a number of matters in his opening statemen t.

Let me simply respond , and we'll deal with his items , the matters he's referred to, as we go through the Estimates . But let me deal with one aspect that he doesn 't appear to deal with, although there may have been a slight reference to it in the Family Court. Since the amalgamation of the Court of Queen 's Bench and the County Court in Winnipeg, I've raised from time to time with the Minister the whole subject of the cost of litigation and tried to make the point that the cost of obtaining justice, particularly through the civil court system, has become excessive for many people.

Only the very rich or the very poor receive legal aid , generally , are able to go through the system without incurring large costs. I think this is an area that the Attorney-General should perhaps direct his department to pay some attention to it. I note in recent months though that the Alberta's Institute of Law Research and Reform have announced the undertaking of a series of stud ies, looking at and exploring ways of reducing litigation costs.

I'm just picking up, as another example , the weekly issue of "The Lawyers' Weekly." The Attorney-General in Ontario is reported as indicating, in his view also, that some radical surgery may be needed if Ontar io's legal system is to respond to the needs of ordinary people in a cost effective way and , in the same way, refe rs to the cost of obtaining justice at the present time, and has talked about a number of particular areas that should be looked at as possible ways of reducing the cost to ordinary , average litigants.

I think this is a matter that the Attorney-General did not address and he may very well be concerned about it, but it is an area I think that perhaps in conjunction with a number of these other groups that the Attorney General and the department should become concerned 2202

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 with and , over the next two years, attempt to address it somewhat. Mr. Chairman , having said that, I think we can proceed onto - unless the Attorney-General wished to make a comment, we could ... HON. R. PENNER: Yes, the member makes a good point. The ADR movement, as it's called, the Alternative Dispute Resolution Movement is picking up steam.

A national conference was held in Winnipeg earlier this year in which in fact the Attorney-General of Ontario delivered the same speech that he subsequently delivered in Ontario, as reported in the newspaper there, not that it wasn't a good speech. It did - this will not surprise you - raise the hackles of many leading members of the Bar, but I think that he was on the right track.

Just for example, we're not talking about family litigation so much, because the model that we've developed is really working very well, where the number of trials has gone away down and the resolution by these other mechanisms has gone away up. But increasingly, looking at North America generally , the courts which are very expensive to maintain - and it doesn't matter whether we pay part of the costs and the feds pay part of the costs, it all comes out of the taxpayer's pocket - are used to litigate complex contract disputes between wealthy corporations .

To the extent that they do that, one is entitled to raise the question: Why don't they find a way of resolving that out of their own pockets? Indeed more and more , fairly technical, difficult contracts of that kind carry an arbitration provision. In effect they're saying, if we get into trouble with this particular contract, rather than going before a judge, who may know a lot about the procedures and due process of law, may not know a lot about this very complex area, we'll resolve it within sort of the family of our own experts. So I take the point of the Member for St.

Norbert, and I think it's something that our own research branch can begin to pay more attention to. MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll begin with Item 1.(b)

(1) Salaries , Current Operating Expenditures. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, the Supplementary Information would indicate there's no change in staff in this particular area, but I happened to notice a Civil Service bulletin the other day which was advertising for an administrative secretary to the Deputy Minister and an office manager to ensure that the Deputy Minister's Office is well organized. I take it Mrs. McBeath has retired and two people are replacing her. HON. R. PENNER: I beg your pardon?

First of all, let me introduce staff who have joined me at the table: the Deputy Minister, Tanner Elton; the Director of Communications, Linda Lee; the Assistant Deputy Minister on the Justice side, Ron Perozzo; Director of Administration, Pat Sinnott; Assistant Deputy Minister on the Criminal side, John Guy; -(Interjection)- Finance - the Director of Finance, Joel Hershfield. Now, the question has been raised as to bulletins that are out with respect to an administrative secretary and a .. . 2203 MR. G. MERCIER: . . . and an office manager for the Deputy Minister's Office. Are these new positions? HON. R.

PENNER: There are two positions in the office and these are for those positions in the office. It's not an addition to the number of persons serving that office. MR. G. MERCIER: When was the second position added then? HON. R. PENNER: It was added last year. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, at the Ministers' Issues Conference held at Hecla Island on April 29 to May 1 for the department, there was a seminar with a Mr. Rubin Nelson, described as Canada 's leading interpreter of fundamental change . Would the Minister indicate what the cost was of obtaining the services of Mr. Nelson? HON. R.

PENNER: There was an all-inclusive contract with Mr. Nelson, which included his attendance at Hecla and includes his work not yet completed on our three year planning process that we're trying to put into place, and other managerial planning instruments of that kind. The fee for Mr. Nelson's total package, including expenses , travel and so on, and including his attendance at Hecla was $2,000.00. MR. G. MERCIER: Where is Mr. Nelson from? HON. R. PENNER: Ontario. MR. G. MERCIER: What are his qualifications? HON. R. PENNER: He's with a consulting firm, Square One Consultants.

I don't know his particular qualifications. To provide further information, I believe that he has a Masters of Business Administration, and he consults to business and to government in terms of management processes and planning processes . MR. G. MERCIER: How much time does the $2,000 contract cover then? HON. R. PENNER: It's result-oriented, rather than time specific. It's not so many hours at so many dollars. It's anticipated, however, that the total amount of time that would be expended in the tasks that have been set for Mr. Nelson would be well in excess of 20 hours. MR. G.

MERCIER: What results are expected from this contract? HON. R. PENNER: Well, specifically, I did mention one of the things that we're looking for, is a planning book, if you will, with respect to various ways of implementing a three-year planning process. That is one such result. At the Hecla Seminar, he was able to speak to the top managerial component of the department, in terms of various approaches to planning. I think that's a very useful thing to do.

It's terrifically important in my view, at a time of constrained resources, to make sure that you're able, within limited resources, to make the best use of those

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 resources ; to be able to anticipate the ups and downs of the resource base over a period of time; to plan for changes that undoubtedly will take place as computerization develops in various elements of the department. I think that, for a very minimal amount of money as consultants go , $2 ,000, including expenses, we're getting value for money. When I say, we, I mean the government and the people of Manitoba. MR. G. MERCIER: But we're getting roughly two days work . Who determined that he was required?

When the Minister has a department and top executive of four ADM 's and executive director of administration , who determined that this man's expertise was required? HON. R. PENNER: The recommendation was reviewed by me - with respect to the whole of the Hecla Seminar - by the Deputy Minister and I took the advice of the Deputy Minister, as I usually but not always do. In this regard, it seemed to me from my own knowlege of the complex workings of the government , a very sensible thing to do.

So the decision was made, both with respect to the seminar as a whole and with respect to its components, ultimately by myself , I take full responsibility for it. But I must say that this notion that this fee is for two days, let me say again, is wrong. The consultant is still in fact doing work for us within that fee base, which will result in, we hope, some very useful planning tools. I think it's a good investment. MR. G. MERCIER: What was the cost of the conference at Gull Harbour? HON. R. PENNER: Just again, I don 't want to quibble with the Member for St. Norbert.

It wasn't a conference; it was a seminar, a planning seminar involving some, I believe, 20 of the top personnel of the department. The tota l cost was between $4,000 to $5 ,000.00. MR. G. MERCIER: For the accommodation? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, for the accommodation and meals. MR. G. MERCIER: What was the total cost to the department? HON. R. PENNER: $4,000 to $5,000.00. MR. G. MERCIER : $45,000.00? HON. R. PENNER : Between $4,000 and $5,000.00. MR. G. MERCIER: That was the total cost to the department? HON. R. PENNER: Over and above the $2,000 paid to Mr. Nelson. MR. G. MERCIER: Last year, Mr.

Chairman, there was a d irective issued by the department to program managers on July 3, 1986 , to reduce the expenditures of the department, I believe, by some $650,000, as all departments had similar directives because the Minister of Finance did not budget for the cost-of-living increase to the Civil Service that began in September, so each department had to make up that cos t. Could the Minister indicate how that $650,000 was made up? What reductions were imposed to make up the savings of $650 ,000.00? HON. R.

PENNER: I'll provide the member with a detailed breakout if he requires, but it was about a 40- 60 split between operations and salaries. In a fairly substantially sized department , such as the Department of the Attorney-General with over 1,000 SY's, we can - and in this case, we did - delay a number of hirings to pick up a lot of salary dollars as part of the component. We deferred expenditures on the operating side to pick up some other dollars. We spread it throughout the system, rather than cutting out a particular program. MR. G.

MERCIER: Will those reductions in expenditures result in any reduction in service to the public? HON. R. PENNER: No. MR. G. MERCIER: Have they been maintained then in this year's budget? HON. R. PENNER: No, it wasn 't affected , subject to checking in a moment, but it wasn't to my knowledge affected by taking out a particular component from the system, eliminating permanently one or more SY's or cutting a program. It was just squeezing everything that we could out of the operations.

It meant that there would be in some areas some temporary delays in service for a period of time, but there was no permanent impairment to service to the public. MR. G. MERCIER: I would appreciate receiving an outline of how the $650,000 figure was obtained. Just on that bent, has the Deputy Minister advised judicial officers paid by the Provincial Government that, for the balance of this year, they will have to purchase their own library materials? HON. R. PENNER: No, I think that there may be some misunderstanding there.

Pursuant to an agreement between ourselves and the Law Society, we very much, very drastically, reformed Library Services. As the Member for St. Norbert may recall, the Great Library - which is the main legal library resource - was owned and operated by the Law Society. In order to assist the Law Society in maintaining that library, because it was used really for the justice system as a whole, we were making substantial grants to the Law Society to assist in carrying forward that operation.

The Law Society was finding it increasingly difficult to maintain the library but also, in our view, there were a great number of inefficiencies. Incidentally, this is not a criticism of the Law Society, but you had that library and the Law Reform Commission had a library and the Crown's Office had a library and there were libraries dispersed throughout the system . We realized that there was bound to be considerable duplication which, given the very high cost of replacement volumes and additional volumes in the Law Report Series, just didn't make sense. 2204

Wednesday, 20 May, 1987 Also, with the introduction of quick law systems where , with relatively inexpensive terminals appropriately placed, you can access the main component of a law series through a master data bank in Kingston , Ontario , we could effect over the long term a number of savings .

Part of the way of introducing and effecting that system was to cut down on the independent requisitioning of library materials by the different units throughout the system so that - just again to use the same example - the Law Reform Commission might have expended in the course of a given year $5,000, $6,000, $7,000 , $10,000, not more than that, on its own purchases . No doubt, if there's lots of money going around - and there isn't - one might justify that , given the particular needs of the Law Reform Commission.

But it was clear that most of the materials being purchased by the Law Reform Commission were, in fact, being purchased centrally through the Great Library and it didn't make sense , given the compactness of the judicial centre that we have here and, in fact, its increasing compactness, to have that kind of decentralized purchasing. MR. G. MERCIER: Just for clarification, is the Minister now saying that the Attorney-General has not sent any memo to anyone in a judicial or quasi-judicial position that they are to be responsible for their own library materials? HON. R.

PENNER: No, I haven't sent such a directive MR. G. MERCIER: I'm saying that the Deputy Minister HON. R. PENNER: No, we simply advise people, but this is some time ago, that - there may be two different components here and I'll deal with both of them - acquisitions are to be done centrally. But for the last part of the last fiscal year, we did freeze acquisitions for a period of time to try and cut down in that area of expenditure. The member just earlier asked me how we save money; that was one of the ways that we saved money.

I believe that a directive went out to all units saying, look, with respect to anything that you want to requisition - because it would be requisitioned through the central purchasing component of the library resource - hold off. That type of directive undoubtedly did go out, but nothing directly to judges. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, could the Attorney General indicate what the status is of the former Assistant Deputy Minister, Mr. Larsen? HON. R. PENNER: He's on study leave.

He's just completing that study leave and will be returning to the jurisdiction sometime in the next few months and will be employed in the Office of Legislative Counsel. MR. G. MERCIER: Is there a vacant position there? HON. R. PENNER: There is a position, yes. MR. G. MERCIER: I'd like to give the Attorney-General an opportunity to indicate whether he will be introducing legislation to force the Federal Government to consult the province on future judicial appointments . HON. R. PENNER: Recently, on a couple of occasions, one of them at Whistler - I never get to make announcements at Whistler.

The Federal Minister of Justice gets to make announcements at Whistler. I get to make them - not even at Hecla - at Fort Rouge. One of the announcemen ts was at Whistler at the mid winter meeting of the Canadian Bar. The Federal Minister of Justice announced that he was, in fact , going to be instituting a defined , consultative process with respect to appointments under

section 96 of the Constitution Act, pursuant to which the feds

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-51
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 51.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	88cc23b5c91d886fd9231547c5b1150f7e9a2716

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