Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 66A (32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-66a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 1 June, 1982 Time - 2:00 p.m. MR. ACTING CLERK, G. Mackintosh: It is my duty to inform the House that Mr. Speaker is unavoidably absent and would ask the Deputy Speaker to take the Chair in accordance with the Statutes. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Deputy Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER, J. Storie: Presenting Peti tions .. Reading and Receiving Petitions . PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for The Pas. MR. H. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Speaker, the Committee of Sup ply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move. seconded by the Member for River East, that the report of the Committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports .. Notices of Motion ... Intro duction of Bills ... ORAL QUESTIONS MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour.

Number one, we heard last even ing a report from the President of the Manitoba Gov ernment Em ployees Association outlining the settle ment which he was announcing, subject to ratification, by the membership of that Union for a two-year agreement. I wonder if the Minister of Labour could confirm the figures that were used by Mr. Doer; namely, that the first-year settlement would be for 10 percent plus $600 per employee which, according to Mr.

Doer, worked out to something in excess of 13 percent for the first year, and that for the second year of the agreement the proposed settlement was for the CPI for the City of Winnipeg - the cost of living for the City of Winnipeg - plus 1.5 percent. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: No, Mr. Speaker, the first year settlement is the proposed settlement, the tenta tive settlement - and of course it's subject to ratifica tion - is 10 percent plus $600 which works out to just under 13 percent on average.

Some em ployees would receive more: the lower paid em ployees would receive more: higher paid em ployees would receive less. With respect to the second year, the Leader of the Opposi tion is correct. 2883 INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before we deal with Oral Questions, if I might introduce some guests and vis itors in the gallery. I'd like to direct the members' attention to the gallery, where we have a group of 13 senior govern ment officials from Anguilla, Dominica, British Virgin Islands, Montserrat, St. Kitts, Nevis, Grenada, St, Vin cent and St. Lucia.

The Eastern Caribbean and Manitoba officials are participating in a program sponsored by the Canadian International Development Agency entitled "Manage ment for Change." The Manitoba and Caribbean offi cials are paired for the precise exchange of informa tion and procedures, in particular administrative and policy areas. As well, we have a group of 23 students of Grade 6 standing from the New Bothwell School. These stu dents are under the direction of Mr. Gorham and are represented by the Honourable Member for La Verendrye. We have 8 students from the Souris Collegiate under the direction of Mrs.

Forfar and these students are in the constituency of the Member for Arthur. Finally, we have a group of 60 students of Grade 5 standing from the Edward Schreyer School under the direction of Mr. Kozusek and are represented by the Honourable Minister of Government Services. On behalf of all the members of the Legislative Assembly, I'd like to welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS (Cont'

d) MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the Minister of Labour could give the House the dollar value that is attached to this proposed settlement, which is still subject to ratification by the MGEA membership. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker. I don't have the exact dollar value here. I'll take the question as notice and get the answer to the Leader of the Opposition. HON. S. LYON: Well, Mr.

Speaker, assuming that the figures given by the Minister of Labour during his Estimates, that the $10 million in the Estimates repre sented about 3.5 percent, would it be safe to assume that in ballpark figures we're looking at a settlement, the cost of which is about $30 million to the taxpayers of Manitoba? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, I haven't worked out the exact number. It could be something like that in gross terms.

I would point out to the Leader of the Opposition however. with people quitting their jobs, retiring, etc .. that the actual figure will probably be somewhere in the range of a little better than one-half

Tuesday, 1 June, 1982 of that, or less than $20 million. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker, we'll be anxious to have the Minister report this figure to us and the particular kind of mathematical alchemy under which he arrived at a figure of something like $30 million being halved as the cost for the settlement this year, that is, presum ing that the figure he gave us during his Estimates of $1 o million representing 3.5 percent, if he can figure out that particular form of mathematics and then let us know the result, we will be quite happy. Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could confirm as well, and he may well have to take this as notice, but according to my figures the settlement with the MGEA for 19 77-78 was 8 percent - that was under the anti inflation rate - for 19 78-79 it was 6 percent, which was the last year of the anti-inflation scheme; 19 79-80 it was 8 percent; 19 80-81 it was 9.5 percent; 19 81 -82 it was 9 percent plus $270 per em ployee, which worked out to about 10 .5 percent.

I would ask the Minister, No. 1, if he could get confirmation of those figures which are figures that we have record of; and No. 2, if he could then advise the House why it was necessary to settle it at approximately 13 percent this year, which appears to be a settlement well in advance of the cost-of-living inc rease for all citizens of Manitoba. At the same time, a further sup plementary, Mr. Speaker, why it is that the public service of Manitoba is settling wage ag reements at a rate or a level well beyond what appears to be the settlements in the private sector? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, we don't have a settlement yet, the re is a vote coming on Monday.

With respect to the percentages that the Leader of the Opposition referred to between '77 and '81, I believe that those are approximately accurate from my recol lection of the history of bargaining during those years, but I note with some interest that the Leader of the Opposition, in using those numbers, didn't use as well the salary of the ope rating head of Hydro, didn't use the salaries that they negotiated as a government just last fall with the Manitoba Public Insu rance Corpora tion em ployees at 14 percent; that's one point higher than this years settlement.

Of course, he's also I'm sure, well aware that there are other public sector settlements which have already been made this year with teachers. We have a fair number of teachers within our own Civil Service com ponent that were at 13 percent and more and if you compared those numbers to the numbers that he just read out for the last four years, you would get some ideas as to the history behind the rationale for our particular proposal with the MGEA. On the whole, Mr. Speaker, I believe it is a reasonable settlement in which there was a good deal of comp romise on both sides. HON. S. LYON: Well, Mr.

Speaker, by way of preface I was asking the Minister only for the MGEA settlement for which he has di rect responsibililty. In our time, and I presume in the time of the present government, Hydro negotiates on its own, subject to notification of the government as to what is taking place. Mr.

Speaker, more impo rtantly, the question I would have to put to the Minister of Labour who is responsi- ble of course for the administration of The Labour Relations Act, and has at least a reporting responsibil ity to this House and the people of Manitoba for wage settlements occurring in the private sector, is the Min ister of Labour satisfied that this kind of a settlement, which seems to be rather generous, lined up with other settlements that are occurring in the private sector where, unless the Minister is unaware of it, times are not at all easy and indeed cutbacks are taking place in some cont racts and in some settle ments, does he not feel that a settlement of this nature with the public service of Manitoba is setting rather a reverse example for what should be set for the total economic picture in Manitoba and indeed in Canada, and further having regard to the fact that at least three provincial ju risdictions have put ceilings on public service settlements and the Federal Gove rnment is talking very seriously about doing the same thing?

HON. V. SCHROEDER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that as the Leader of the Opposition is awa re, this matter is just now being taken to a vote by the MGEA, and I think it would be appropriate to wait with com ment - and there is a good deal of corn ment that cou Id be made - until after that vote has been taken. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister of Community Services and arises out of discussions in this House last week about a so-called policy decision with respect to work activ ity projects in the province.

I would ask the Ministe r, who said at the time that a policy decision had been made and it was the justification for the

summary dis placement of Mr. Doug Wark at Westbran in Bran don, whether he has proceeded with sepa ration of the two jobs in the other regions, the two jobs being work activity project manager and em ployment services co-ordinator, historically a dual position, Mr. Speaker? Has the Minister proceeded with the separation and splitting of those two jobs in the other regions? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. 2884 HON. L. EVANS: I am advised by my Deputy that the matter is in process. MR. L. SHERMAN: Would it be safe to assume, Mr.

Speaker, that the matter would be in process for a long, long, long time having suffered exposure through the Minister's folly at Westbran and that now those em ployment services co-o rdinators and work activity project managers may be secure in their positions? HON. L. EVANS: As we have explained before, we want to put more em phasis on putting welfare recip ients who are employable to work. We have more money in the budget this year and we have some money in Sup plementary Estimates and I trust that we are going to be able to put forward a greater effort to get more value for the taxpaye rs' money.

In that respect, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to advise the member that we will be having discussions with all

key staff involved in this and I intend to visit the var ious projects about the province and intend to get more information to assure myself that the taxpayers of this province are going to get value for their money. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, why would the Minis ter be doing that now if the "policy decision" was made "several months ago?" HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, this is to ensure that policy im plementation does take place. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister advise how the new work activity project managers in those other regions will be hired? How will they be sought out?

Who will lead the list of candidates? How will the applications be handled? HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, we will be making at least two announcements in the near future spelling out some of the details that the honourable member is enquiring about. You know, I'd like to advise the hon ourable members across the way that the individual they keep on referring to in Brandon used to be a card-carrying Conservative, a very staunch member of the Conservative Party up until a short while ago. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, if the Minister is intending to make two announcements with respect to each of those possible new administrative jobs and to conduct a search of candidates to fill them, would he consider rolling back the

summary displacement of Mr. Wark and the

summary hiring of Mr. Burke at Westbran and handling that project in the same pru dent and fair manner? HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon ourable member that we're giving the entire matter priority consideration and we're spending a great deal of time on this. We will do what is necessary to make sure that we get a larger throughput through all the work activity projects and I make no apology, I think there is some value in having a person with business expertise involved in work activity projects. Mr.

Speaker, I suggested last week and I repeat again that it may be possible that we need a com pletely new thrust, which means funnelling in welfare recipients who are em ployable into private industry for training rather than in public works type of pro jects, which have tended to be the case in the past and which the honourable member should have known were extremely ex pensive. We find a case where staff are being maintained, salaries of staff are going up and yet the throughput of the participants is dwin dling. Certainly it is a situation that demands attention and will get attention.

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I wonder if I could interrupt again, we have two distinguished guests to the loge on my left. We have Mr. Jake Froese, the former Member for Rhineland and Mr. Morris McGregor, the former Member for Virden. As well, we have a group of eight students in the gallery who have just arrived. I announced them ear- 1 June, 1982 lier but they were not in the gallery. These students are from the Souris Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Forfar and are represented by the Honourable Member for Arthur. On behalf of all members, I welcome you here today.

The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. ORAL QUESTIONS (Cont'

d) MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Honourable Minister of Community Services whether he can confirm that, in fact, the productivity of the Westbran project is not significantly down from pre vious years and that the Minister never discussed this concern of productivity with senior officials of his Emplo yment Services Division. -( Interjecti on )- His wife, but he never discussed it with senior officials of his Em ployment Services Division, Mr. Speaker. Well, Mr.

Speaker, then I put another question to the Minister and ask him whether he can confirm that when he told the House last week that Westbran's client enrolment had dropped off from 396 in 1974-75 to 56 in 1981 -82, that he was using a 12 month total figure for 1974-75 and a 3 month figure for 1981-82. 2885 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Community Services. HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, my arithmetic is as good as the members opposite any day and the 56 figure is a 12 month average.

I was given the data; we double-checked it and we triple-checked it and the 56 is a 12 month average, which means that, on a partici pant basis, it cost the taxpayers over $12,000 to put - and that, Mr. Speaker, doesn't include all the sup port services that come from community colleges, other agencies and so on. So the real cost is far more than $12,000.00. I calculated, Mr. Speaker, if you took those people and you paid them all the new minimum wage that was announced, we could have 50 percent more occupied 12 months of the year and they'd get over $8,000 a year.

As it is, the participants at that project got barely over $3,000 on average in the year 1981 -82, but the figure 56 was double-checked and that is the correct figure, as far as the information is concerned, given to me by my staff. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Min ister to triple-check then, if he has only double checked. The figure 56 represents the period January 1 st to March 31 st, 1982 and even so, Mr. Speaker, if he wants to take is on a 12 month average, then take everything on a 12 month average.

Fifty-six on a 12 month average used the same way he used the 396 would add up to 672; 56 for each of 12 months. That is how he got his figure of 396 for 1974-75. -(Inter jection )- I don't need a better leak, Mr. Speaker. This is information from the department which the Minister knows and the Minister purposely used selectively. Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister confirm for example, that when he gave the figure 85 people for 1980 -81, that the 85 only represents the people that were taken on new in calendar year 81 and does not include those enrollees and participants that were already in the course at the time that those new figures and new

Tuesday, 1 June, 19 82 members were taken on. HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I was given a set of figures by key people in the de partment and the fig ures, as I understand, were given to me on a compara ble basis, so I would think that the information is consistent and comparable. In fact, I am convinced and there's no question in my mind, that the participa tion has fallen off rather dramatically in the past four to five years and that to me, Mr. Speaker, in this day and age of increasing welfare payments, is a very, very sad thing. MR. L. SHERMAN: Well, Mr.

Speaker, can the Minis ter confirm that he used these exact figures last month, in May, in a speech in Brandon and that he was corrected on them by his officials at that time; that the discrepancies were pointed out at that time and he got up in the House last week and used them again, with the same discrepancies in them. HON. L. EVANS: Yes, I MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. HON. L. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, I made no public statement or speech in the City of Brandon on the date that the member refers to, but I did have a private, confidential meeting with the new board advising them of my serious concern about the problem that I've described to the honourable members and, indeed, there was a reference made to the numbers, whether they were higher or lower or what have you and, as a matter of fact, this is the reason we triple-checked and found out that 56 was an accurate estimate. I haven't been told otherwise since I made that statement by anyone. -( Interjecti on )- Yes, I've asked. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy and Mines. Can the Minister of Energy and Mines advise the House how many people have been laid off as a con sequence of the unfortunate closing of the two mines by Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting in the Snow Lake area. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARA SIUK: I'll have to take the question as notice. My understanding is that these are contract miners; I'll take the question as notice and I'll get back to the member. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, I expect contract miners have to eat too. A question to the Minister of Finance, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday I tabled a letter in the House which was addressed to the Minister of Finance. It came from the St. John's United Church and requested an exemp tion from the payroll tax which the Minister has imposed in his Budget, and which the Church regards as a very unfair tax, adding insult to injury. Has the Minister yet responded to that letter and if so, can he advise the House the nature of the response. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before the Minister answers the questions, I'd like to direct members' attention to the Speaker's Gallery where we have the presence of Her Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor. The Honourable Minister of Finance. ORAL QUESTIONS (Cont'

d) HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I have received that letter and I have prepared a response which I expect will be going out shortly. I've explained to the Church that over the next five years, we have lost some $719 million in funding for Post Secondary Education and Health and we have had to seek ways of replacing that particular loss and we have come to the conclusion that, in general, the levy which we have proposed is one which is more fair to Manitobans than any alternative levy.

We have pointed out, as well, that one of the alterna tives would be the Ontario alternative where employees of churches are taxed at up to $648 per emp loyee for just their medical care premiums on their own and that, in fact, if we had taken that alternative, they would also have had to discuss, in all likelihood, com pensation with their employees because as fair em ployers I am sure that they wouldn't want their em ployees to take that kind of burden, Mr. Speaker.

I am in the process of explaining as well that we could have chosen other alternatives such as the sales tax increase which would have been devastating, just absolutely devastating, to the small retail trade sector in this province; which would have been devastating especially to the rural towns in Western Manitoba who came to my office, whose municipal officials and Chambers of Commerce came to my office, asking that we try to do something that wouldn't put them in a total ly noncompetitive situation with their neighbours.

I have pointed out again that tax is one which pro vides sup port for all Manitobans for that health care. All Manitoba em ployers get benefits out of that health care system; we feel that all em ployers must share in the burden now of paying for that system. I will also repeat again here today that if we receive the $719 million back which was taken away that we will eliminate the tax. The tax is there as a replacement for lost funds. If we get the funds back we will elimi nate the tax. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Finance. Has the Minister received a letter from St. Chad's Anglican Church asking him to adjust the legislation as it pertains to the 1.5 percent payroll tax? 2886 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: That particular letter hasn't

been brought to my attention yet, Mr. Speaker, but if and when it is, I can tell the honourable member that my response to the church will be an explanation that is very similar to the explanation I made in answer to the previous question, that is, that we have lost $719 million over the next five years for the purposes of Health and Post-Secondary Education. -(Interjec tion )- It is very clear that members opposite are hav ing great difficulty in understanding exactly what it is that th is tax is all about and why it was required; I am trying to explain it.

I see the members are getting restless -(Inter jection )- maybe, what I'll do is just refer the member to my previous answer. MRS. G. HAMMON D: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to table a copy of the lette r for the Minister's information. In light of the fact that churches and non profit char itable organizations do not file a federal tax return, would the Minister confirm that this 1.5 payroll tax is double taxation? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, I had indicated in answer to the question from the former Minister of Finance that we did have an alternative.

An alternative was to cha rge up to $648 per year to employees of those very same churches who would have to pass that one, surely, to their employe rs. I am sure that the churches are as good employers as others, for instance, the Federal Gove rnment; for instance, the average employer in the Province of Ontario who pays more than 70 percent of that Medicare premium down the re.

So if we had set up a program similar to Onta rio's, and assuming that churches are employers who are as concerned as the average employer about the welfare of their emp loyees, then 70 percent of this would have come from the employer in that case as well. I should also point out that when the member refers to double taxation that, in general, the funds which the church pays to its em ployees are not funds which have been taxed; that is, they were deductible from the donor's income for tax purposes and therefore there was no income tax to the province on that particular income. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Min iste r of Finance, could the Minister of Finance advise as to the number of employers who are making arran gements to convert their employees into independent contractors in order to avoid payment of the payroll tax? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: We will take a look at any changes and we will, of course, respond in the appropriate way if there are any difficulties with respect to the collection of this particular levy.

The levy is there for the purpose of ensuring that we have funds to protect the integrity of our health and post secondary education system. I would assume that 1 June, 1982 Manitoba employers are not going to act in an irres ponsible fashion, no more than the employers in Quebec responded in an irresponsible fashion to a tax which, incidentally, is double the amount of this tax at 3 percent of payroll.

Well, I wouldn't expect that the Tory prophets of doom and gloom are very likely to be correct in assum ing that employers in this province are going to be somehow devious and try to avoid their responsibility to pay their fair share for two systems that are indeed expensive, are some of the best of their kind in Can ada, and systems that we want to keep, in effect, in the equality way and the way in which we are again beginning to build it up after four years of neglect. MR. G.

MERCIER: In view of the fact that the Minister calls his payroll tax a levy for health purposes, would he exempt the League for Life, Mr. Deputy Speaker, whose main objective is the preservation of health - the children? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, I couldn't think of an organization that ought to be more willing to pay for exactly that preservation of health which our sys tem so well provides in this province.

That league must su rely be aware that there are millions of dollars spent in Manitoba every month on the preservation of life and limb and they are one of the organizations that I am sure will be delighted to pay their fair sha re, not more than their fair share, just their fair share of the amount that we have had to tax by reason of a cutback in transfer payments. I say again to the Member for St. Norbert that we will remove this tax if we receive a similar amount of money back, that is the $719 million which is a dec rease in transfer payment, if we receive that back then we will eliminate this tax. 2887 MR.

G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, in view of the Minis ter's answers then, could he confirm that his payroll tax is indeed a health care premium? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, it is a levy di rected at all employers in the province for the pur pose of our Health and Post-Secondary Education system. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I have a final question for the Minister in his othe r capacity as the Ministe r of Labour. Mr. Speaker, the criteria for the Minister's Career lnternship Program makes employers with ten or more staff ineligible for the program. Mr.

Speaker, I've received some correspondence from a constituent who operates a service station who has - besides the owne r and his wife , who's a book keeper - 4 additional full-time staff plus 4 part-time staff who work 12 to 18 hours per week. The total is 1 O em ployees which makes them ineligible, but would the Minister agree to review his criteria because this particular employer has participated in the youth employment prog rams du ring past years and having 6 full-time em ployees plus 4 part-time employees, who only work 12 to 18 hours, I think shouldn't make them ineligible for the program? HON. V.

SCHROEDER: Well, Mr. Speaker, if the

Tuesday, 1 June, 19 82 member would send the information to me, I'd be glad to take a look. As I recollect the criteria when they were originally drafted, it was simply 10 employees and I believe that it was assumed that it would be 10 full- time employees. If there's some area for doubt and if, of course, the employer qualifies in terms of having a program which is eligible in itself for the program, then I would undertake at least to review that issue in that case. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Natural Resources. On April 27th, I gave notice by way of letter to the Minister regarding a tile drainage problem in the Gainsborough area south of Portage la Prairie. As domestic wells continue to drop in the area, can the Minister now indicate what his department has done to address that particular problem? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon ourable member for having given me notice of the question.

I have sent a letter to the member, but per haps it would have been better if I'd hand delivered it to him but it has gone. In the letter it does point out that this is a matter of a longstanding problem. This development took place some time ago when this tile drainage was put in and it was established without the concurrence or without the approval of the Department of Natural Resources under the previous administration.

So the department -(Interjection )- no, the department was not involved in that, but we have monitored the flows from the drainage and it does not appear that there has been any marked decline in the water table in the area. Now, of course, this is subject to continuing concern and we will continue to monitor the situation there. MR. C. MANNESS: Well, thank you for the answer, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact though that Mr. Martin, some two miles removed from this particular

section of land has had a dry well since December, and people in the area indicate that in fact a vast number of trees have died over the last two years, could the Minister indicate whether his department will do anything more than monitor the situation or will an attempt be made to prevent large outflows of subsurface water from the area? HON. A. MACKLING: Well, Mr. Speaker, let me clearly indicate that I see the development there was not carried out, I make this clear, with the approval of the then administration, the former government or its staff.

We have been concerned because of the com plaints; we have looked into them. The reports we've received have indicated there doesn't seem to be any great problem at this time. In the whole area. the whole of southwestern Mani toba, there is a problem because the area has been a subject of extensive drought conditions.

We haven't had the normal replenishment of the water table in that area, so there is a problem of the declining water table because of drought conditions, but whether or not the change in the ground water in that area is attributable to the drainage system that was employed by that private development, my department is not very conclusive about their review. I've asked that they continue to monitor that situation. MR. C MANNESS: Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as the res idents of that area are themselves convinced that the tiled drain

section in question has some direct bearing on the dropping of their wells and as officials of the Department of Natural Resources were out in attend ance and met most recently with the people con cerned a year ago, will the Minister endeavor to have people within his department again meet with the local people and explain to them firsthand the situation? HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I want to clearly indicate to the honourable member that I am prepared individually, and personally, when I have an opportunity, to personally deal with some of those complaints and investigate them, because I'm pre pared to do that. I will respond to the needs of Manito bans wherever they are and I'll certainly be concerned that my staff continue to monitor that situation. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Finance.

In light of the obvious concern for auto salemen demonstrated by his colleague, the Minister of Community Services, in his recent hiring practices, has the Minister of Finance and his staff had an opportunity to provide information and support to the commissioned auto salesmen in the Province of Manitoba who are being reassessed by the Federal Government for taxation in several years past? 2888 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, as I understand the problem, the Federal Income Tax people have reassessed a number of sales people in the province because they have deducted items which the federal people view to be not deductible in that they were expenses not incurred for the purpose of earning an income. As the member knows, the people involved do have the right to appeal that ruling to the Tax Appeal Board and there are other processes after that, regular legal processes.

They have had several dis cussions with members of my staff and I believe that there was communication within the last several weeks, but I could undertake to provide the member with a fuller report at a later time. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary to the Minister of Finance. It's my understanding that this reassessment is predicated on a new

interpretation made by the federal officials and that this

interpretation contravenes some assessments made over the past several years. In view

Tuesday, 1 June, 1982 of that information that so many people are affected, has his departmental staff made representation to the federal department and voiced the province's concern that their

interpretation is not a correct one since all

interpretations of The Income Tax Act are subject to varying opinions? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, if the interpreta tion of the Income Tax Department is incorrect, then I'm sure that the Tax Appeal Board will so find and if they don't, then the other - I believe it winds up finally at federal court levels and Courts of Appeal. I do not believe that there have been any representations made from my department to the federal department suggesting to them that they should change their

interpretation. I know I had written a letter some time ago asking a particular representative of that organization whether , in fact, he had been assessed using a different type of

interpretation in the past and whether there were any

interpretation bulletins out by the Income Tax people indicating that at one time in accordance with their

interpretation bulletins they, in fact, were assessing differently than they now are. I don't recall having received an

interpretation bulletin from either that individual or from my officials indicating that type of income had in the past been treated differently. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The time for Oral Questions has expired. MOTION OF CONDOLENCE MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to now offer a few words in respect to the condolence motion, that notice was given of yesterday during the Question Period.

As we all recognize, we have had the untimely death of our Clerk of the Legislature and we all are most anxious to pay tribute to one who was a loyal and a faithful servant of the Province of Manitoba. Mr. Dep uty Speaker, I'd like to also point out and to mention, indeed to welcome, the presence of Her Honour, the Lieutenant -Governor, who was a very close, intimate, personal friend of the late Jack Reeves. I'm sure that all members join with me in welcoming her attend ance during the paying of this tribute. Jack Reeves sat in the Legislature as a servant for 19 years.

He was appointed Deputy Clerk of the Legisla ture in 1963 and held that position continuously until he was appointed Clerk in 1973. I think it's fair to say that he came to know the Assembly, the character of our debate, our moods and even what we were likely to do in either committee or in debate probably better than anyone else in this Chamber. During his years of long service he saw different faces come and go; he saw governments come and go. In fact, there is none among us today that sat longer in a continuous fashion as a Member of the Legislative Assembly dur ing those 19 years.

Jack Reeves was Deputy Clerk, then Clerk of the Assembly. Indeed, there are only two members among us today that were sitting here when he first took up his duties at the table. Jack Reeves served during five different govern ments; yet, it is a mark of the man that he did not use his great experience and seniority as a barrier; he was always approachable. He was willing to listen to the most junior members of this Chamber, just as he was to the First Minister and to the Leader of the Opposi tion.

We all came to realize and we all knew that he knew the Rules and the operation of the House as well as anyone and that his advice would be most valuable. As one of many who worked with Jack Reeves while in Opposition, then again in government while an MLA and as a member of the Treasury Board, I was always struck by the fairness of his attitude. He did not differentiate between the various political parties in the execution of his duties, nor did he demonstrate any favouritism either toward the Government nor to the Opposition.

He was a loyal servant of us all and of the legislative tradition that we now represent. I think it's significant that Jack Reeves served 21 years in the Canadian Army before he became a pub lic servant of Manitoba in 1960 when he took a job with the Department of the Provincial Secretary. There have always been occasions that bring credit to no one in this Chamber from time to time and in this institution that the participants indeed look back upon with regret. Jack Reeves did not permit those inci dents to harm his duty in his loyalty to the Assembly.

In those difficult times he indeed soldiered on know ing that there would be other occasions when we all would meet and gain, indeed, the highest standards of parliamentary tradition. Jack Reeves spent his entire career serving his country and his province in tasks that are done best when the doer himself, or herself, is invisible. He main tained that low profile continuously, immensely, to the effective operation of this Chamber. It's tragic that he was never able to enjoy years of retirement.

Yet, looking at the tremendous record of dedicated service that Jack Reeves has left behind, I'm reminded of Browning's words, "Life is perfected by death." Jack Reeves exemplified that most noble principle of pub lic service; he died while serving as the Assembly's chief servant and true guide. So, Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honour able Leader of the Opposition, that this House convey to the family of the late Jack Ross Reeves, who served as a Clerk of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, its sincere.sympathy in their bereavement and its appre ciation of his devotion to duty in a useful life of active public service and that, Mr. Speaker, be requested to forward a copy of this resolution to the family. MOTION presented. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. 2889 HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, I am honoured to second the resolution and to associate my colleagues and myself with the remarks of the First Minister. I think it is altogether fitting that the Resolution of Con dolence should be moved in this House as an honour to our late friend and Clerk, Jack Ross Reeves. Such

Tuesday, 1 June, 19 82 resolutions. Sir, as we all know, are traditionally moved only as marks of condolence for members and former members of this Chamber. However, no one would question the appropriateness of Jack Reeves being made an honourable exception to this rule. For 22 years, he has been as close as any member or any nonelected person can be to this House.

After his long career in the armed forces to which the First Minister made reference, he came in 1960 to the first of his House-related positio ns from which he rose through the ranks, so to speak, under the guidance of Charland Prud'homme to become the Chief Electoral Officer and ultimately the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly. Mr. Speaker, I was one of the two members who sat in the House when Jack Reeves first came to this table, along with I believe the Honourable Minister of Health.

Indeed, it was only six days ago that he was struck down after putting in a full day's work at the task that he knew so well and that which he had gained eminence among his peers across the country. He was not a lawyer. Some would say that was among his greater strengths, yet he brought to his task as Chief Counsellor to you and to each member of this House, Mr. Speaker, a kind of unobtrusive authority which derived from his long experience, from his common sense, from his innate fairness and from his willingness and his ability to see both sides of any question.

Equally, he could see the good in each person, even though sometimes those of us of less insight perhaps could not. I know of no one that he called an enemy. Hate and envy were foreign to his makeup. He was, indeed, one of nature's gentlemen. This is not to say that he lacked strong convictions. He was a student of our parliamentary system and devoted, not only to its forms but, more importantly, to the end result of its deliberations and of its institutionalized practices; namely, the service of the public interest.

As a man, he was a friend to all and one whose cheery encouragement and whose example of good will and of hard work enriched the lives of those fortu nate enough to move in his circle. He will be greatly missed, but he will also be fondly remembered by all who have passed through this House in his time. To Mrs. Reeves, to Jack's two daughters, three sur viving sons and to the granddaughter, we extend out sincere condolences in their loss of husband and father and grandfather.

Along with them we, in this House, rejoice in having experienced his love and his friendship and we rejoice as well that he is now at rest with God. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Concordia. MR. P. FOX: Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to add a few words of condolence on my own. Having worked very closely with Jack during my period when I was involved with the Legislative Branch I got to know Jack quite well. I found him a very, very proficient and excellent civil servant and dedicated in his work.

It was one of the things that I always admired that, no matter how late we sat. the following day he would be there, fresh and ready to proceed again, no matter what the tribulations and the day before had been like. I should just like to indicate that Jack was born on May 14, in 1919 in Regina. His education was in Win nipeg public schools, also Wesley College, later became the United College and still later the Univer sity of Winnipeg. He served in the Armed Forces from 1939 until 1960 and, of course, that gave me some affinity again because I, too, had served in the Armed Forces.

He joined the Manitoba Government in 1960 as Administrative Officer and from then on in, of course, many of us know of his service. Not all of us have had the full opportunity of having been present duri ng all of his time but I know there are a number of members here who go back as far as Jack did in llis service to tile Province of Manitoba. Besides being an Administrative Officer in tile Department of Provincial Secretary, lle was Deputy Clerk from 1963 to 1973 of tllis Assembly. He was tile Deputy Chief Electoral Officer from 1968 to 1971.

In 1971 to 1980, he was Chief Electoral Officer and up until tile present time, from 1973, he was the Clerk of tile Legislative Assembly. I tllink we can all say tllat Jack did a very great service to tllis province and I am pleased to be able to participate in condolences to llis family to indicate that Jack really served the province well. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I too would like to associate myself with the motion before us.

Like the former speaker, the Member for Concordia, I had a privilege to know Jack probably in a more intimate way than most members of the Assembly would have and, in doing so, I found that Jack was a man who was totally dedicated to the retention of the parliamentary system, the rules, the customs, the traditions and was very concerned with the proper procedures that were used to conduct the business of the House.

His ability to withstand the pressures of extended hours of speed-up was almost unbelievable. 2890 I recall one particular time and Jack had the dub ious or the dual role - I shouldn't say dubious, it was the distinctive role of being the Chief Electoral Officer as well as the Clerk of the House - I think that very few people understood the pressures that would be put on that one pair of shoulders when we would sit here until maybe 3:00 or 3:30 in the morning to finally prorogue the House and call an election.

Here was our Clerk winding up all the odds and ends of the business of the Assembly and thrown into the midst of a provincial election at the same time. How the man carried on is almost unimaginable. I don't think he could have done it without a very dedicated staff and, as I look in the gallery, I see some of them sitting there. I think it would only be fair to mention one in particular, Mrs. Simmie, who worked many years in Mr. Reeves' office and was indeed his right hand.

Jack was a man who had one particular interest outside of this Legislature, namely, the Winnipeg Blue Bombers and I recall many hours of discussion and Jack's keen interest in that particular sport. It was a credit to the man and a mark of his character that his devotion to that particular sport and that particular

team was as steadfast and as strong throughout their ups and downs as his devotion to this Assembly. He will be fondly remembered and deeply lost in my own personal life because I considered his influence on my life to be very personal and rewarding, and for that I thank the opportunity that I have had to work with him quite closely for a four-year period. I'm sure there are other members that think of Jack for different reasons but I've outlined a few of the points that I found to be extremely rewarding and that friendship was one that I cherish very strongly. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I would feel remiss if I didn't say a word or two on this solemn occasion in respect and in support of the Motion of Condolence to our late Clerk, Jack Reeves. I suppose I have known Jack longer than anyone in the Chamber. I got to know Jack in the late '40s and through the '50s when he was on the A & T staff at Fort Osborne Barracks when I was serving as paymaster for the 6th Field Engineer Regiment in the Militia.

Jack was a member of the instructional staff that would visit around to the various Militia units to check up on them every couple of weeks and see that the procedures, the rules and the instructions were being followed carefully in accordance with the regulations of the Canadian Army. He took his job at that particular time seriously; he was meticulous and everything was by the book, so to speak.

I can remember later on in the Minto Armouries when I moved into Winnipeg, Jack was the Orderly Room Sergeant for one of the other Militia units - not mine- and he would virtually strike fear into the hearts of some of the young recruits for not following some of the instructions as carefully as they should, but with that he had their full respect and provided them with the guidance and direction that they wouldn't have, I don't think, from anyone else other than someone who was as dedicated and of strong character such as Jack Reeves.

I later, of course, continued that friendship and acquaintance when I was elected to this Legislature when Jack was the Deputy Clerk and moved up a year later to Clerk of this Assembly and I, too, as the Member for Virden said, have enjoyed his counsel, direction and friendship for many years and he will be sadly lost, as a personal note, and I know it's a big loss to this Assembly. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it's a privi lege to just add a word in support of the Motion of Condolence that is being presented today. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MS. M. DOLIN: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in speaking of Mr. Jack Reeves, I would like to point out to this Assembly that Jack was a resident of Garden City, the Garden City area of Winnipeg and therefore a constit uent of mine in Kildonan. I sincerely regret that just as I was beginning to discover the wealth of information and assistance that this quiet man had to offer to all of us he was so suddenly taken from us. I was impressed with his 1J une,1982 continuing evenness of temperament throughout anything that happened in this House or, in fact, in the entire government.

His willingness to help new members was a great boon to all of us. I am so sorry that we had such a short time, those of us who are new to this Assembly, to get to know this man and to profit from that experience. We will all miss his presence in this House. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burrows. MR. C. SANTOS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As a new member of this Legislative Assembly it was my privi lege to approach Jack Reeves one time when I was about to take my Oath of Office and request of him if he could do it in a public place.

So I gave him two dinner tickets, to a party at the Convention Centre and he said, "Doctor, I can't come because my wife is an invalid but I will do my duty and I can come alone." I said, "I would appreciate that" and he did. He came there on time and sat at the head table and adminis tered the Oath of Office. As a new member, I am very grateful - he doesn't even know me or anything - but that is, to my mind, a good example of service to a member of this Legisla tive Assembly.

If there is any meaning in life it's the service that we give to people, not only because they do something for us but because they need it. The greatest waste, I think, any man can spend in his life is to refuse to love and to refuse to render the service that he can give to others. I could say that Jack Reeves had indeed lived his life well and had shown a good example for us. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 2891 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I just would like to add my name to those comments and expressions of sympathy and condolences that have been expressed in memory of Jack Reeves. My first recollection of Jack Reeves was in 1966, after Jack had served some three years in the Chamber, and our Clerk of the Assembly then was the venerable Charland Prud'homme who, although certainly most approachable and helpful to all members, but could have at some times a certain intimidating air about him. As a rookie Minister in 1966 it was natural, I suppose, that I would avail myself more often to the services and to the seeking for help to Jack Reeves.

So from my earliest experience in this Chamber that was the association that I was privileged to have with Mr. Reeves and it was privileged to remain that way for the remaining years of his service in this Chamber and mine to date, as of last week. I might say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that service rendered was in no way influ enced by what side of the House a member sat on, whether you were on the Ministry, Treasury Benches or on Opposition Benches, an opportunity that I've had to share in this Chamber. So, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, it is my privilege to asso ciate the constituency of Lakeside and myself with the condolence motion as moved by the First Minister.

Tuesday, 1 June, 1982 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney General. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Deputy Speaker, my remarks will be brief but, nonetheless, sincere and heartfelt. For all of that, I suppose no one needs the service of a person like Jack Ross Reeves more than a novice House Leader - and this is not meant to disparage the very great assistance I've had from my Legislative Assistants - but at all times when a problem arose and in the

interpretation of rules, as inevitably problems will, Jack Reeves was available. What I admired mostly about Jack, and I admired many things, was that when there would be, as inevitably there must be, some difference about the

interpretation of rules, Jack would be quite firm in his opinion and hold to it but nevertheless would reflect, would look up author ity and might come back to offer perhaps a different

interpretation or to yield a point. I think that's the mark of greatness in a person when they can do that and so I take pleasure in being able to associate myself, I find it a privilege, let me say, to be able to associate myself with the remarks of condolence that are being offered in address to this resolution. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Springfield. MR. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as many members in this Chamber know, I had an extended period of friendship and service in this Assembly with Mr.

Reeves over a period of seven Sessions, but prob ably what very few people know is that the reason I am a member in this Assembly and the reason I am a resident to the Province of Manitoba is because a clerk, in a Clerk's Office, in this province in the late 60s welcomed me and provided assistance and guidance in doing some research when I was a graduate student in university.

He taught me something about what our Minister of Tourism would like to talk about- Friendly Manitoba and made me feel at home, and it was rather peculiar in 1973, when I first arrived in this province and was engaged in a position of service to this House, that I knew one person in the Province of Manitob a- no one else. It seems peculiar now in memory, but just nine years ago today, I joined the Civil Service of the Prov ince of Manitoba knowing one person and that person is gone. Mr.

Speaker, I mention that, not because of the significance it has for me but because of what it tells me and what I've seen over those nine years; not just 22 years of service to the Assembly - longer than all but two members here; not just a dedication to serving the House, members and long hours; not just a dedi cation to a family, to his wife Joan, but an anomaly because Jack hated politics. I don't think anybody in this House who knew Jack well would deny that polit ics, which is really what this Chamber is all about, is something Jack didn't like. He loved the institution; that's what he cared about.

He cared about the results of what we would do in this Chamber for the people of this province. He cared about the programs. He asked the Ministers and Opposition members intelligent questions off to the side about what they were doing because he cared, 2892 but he allowed no one to challenge this institution. He would draw them aside; he would speak to them quietly; he would speak to them carefully. He guided speakers; he guided members.

He had a tremendous sense of the value of our parliamentary institutions and although some of us, when we're new and I certainly was one, could never understand why some of the things we did were done the way they were done. Jack was able to reach back into history and provide examples, provide us with an understanding of the basis of the institution and how important it was that that tradition was maintained; and how significant it would be if we ever broke from that; and how only by holding that could we build new.

He was one who believed - and I suppose some would say in a very small "c" Conservative way- that we build on what we have by understanding it, appreciating it and learning from those experiences. I never had, Mr. Speaker, an opportunity to work with someone as closely before in my life and I cer tainly found that he instilled those values with me. Some might say it's a wonder if he instilled those values that I would end up on this side of the House.

However, I think he did instil! those values and I think those are some of the fundamentals with which I approach my role as an MLA and I hope that, in terms of those values, I will do him credit. Mr. Speaker, more important than that, I think he's instilled those values in almost all the members of this House. I think that's significant. Mr. Speaker, no one has made mention of the role Jack performed in the development of member servi ces, the Rules of the House, the leadership that he showed in those areas because the Clerk does not do those things.

The Clerk is the person who implements the decisions that are made by members, but all of us know that he showed leadership in electoral reform, he showed leadership in the provision of services to members and those are things for which I believe we have to be grateful. He also made us aware very much of the perception of this place when he said things like: "After two or three Sessions it all sounds the same." My first Ses sion in the House I paid attention very diligently; second Session almost as diligently; but by the third Session I was beginning to wonder.

He also said in 1977 in the fall, when I started expressing amazement of what was taking place on one side of the House, he said: "Oh, I've seen it before. After an election, they just trade speeches. You needn't be amazed." Those are the kind of anec dotal thoughts about Jack that give us an insight into a man who, although totally dedicated to the service of the House, was able to look at all of us and smile. That's a strange quality and that enabled him to serve us with the even temperament, the unflapability that so many have commented on.

Many of you, I believe, have had opportunities to go with him to his favourite luncheon spot, which has now been changed, just across the river. I had an opportunity to travel extensively with him in the pro vince, in the country, and certainly the one quality that stands out in all of that memory is the dignity, the respect, the unquestioning allegiance to what the Assembly represents - a fundamental belief in parlia mentary democracy-that I believe in him went deeper

than I have seen it in any other person because it represented a total commitment.

Now, some of us had trouble getting to know an austere, stoic, sometimes gruff gentleman in a gown and vest, but I know that all of us when we recognized that in that military bearing and meticulousness there was someone who was dedicated to this House, we found inside that, a very warm caring person; a person who made a very small staff perform wonde rous things in both election administration and the admin istration of the House because he ope rated a team; a person of military backg round who could put together a team; never a man to bark orders but instead a man to work with a team and build and get things done.

That's something for us, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and that's something for us to build on. To Jack's wife and family, it's been said, goes our sympathy, but I think it is more than that, I think it's our respect. I know that Jack cared very deeply for his wife, and her health and her welfare were always on his mind. I think it's important that be noted at this time. Mr. Speaker, I believe the House has lost a loyal servant and a defender of its traditions and its rights; I believe the province has lost a fine Clerk but, Mr.

Speaker, I, for one and I am sure every other member in this Chamber, has also lost a very good friend. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. QUESTION put; MOTION carried. COMMITTEE CHA NGES MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Govern ment House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Deputy Speake r, before cal ling Orders of the Day, may I announce some changes with respect to the membership on the Committee of Economic Development which is meeting on Thurs day.

For the Minister of Northern Affairs, the Minister of Economic Development; the Minister of Transpor tation begs leave to substitute the Member for Rupertsland, the Membe r for The Pas and the Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Second Reading on Bill No. 28,

an Act to amend Various Acts relating to Courts of the Province? SECOND READING - GOVERNMENT BILLS Bill NO. 28 -

AN ACT TO AMEND VARIOUS ACTS RELATING TO COURTS OF THE PRO�NCE HON. R. PENNER presented Bill No. 28,

an Act to Amend Va rious Acts relating to Courts of the Pro vince, for second reading. MOTION presented. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney General. HON. R. PENNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Bill No. 1J une,1982 28 int roduces relatively minor amendments to The Queen's Bench Act, The County Court Act and The Su rrogate Courts Act. The amendments to The Queen's Bench Act, Mr.

Speaker, had been prepared for the 1981 Session of the Legislature, but due to an unfo rtunate mix-up in the records of the Office of Legislative Counsel the amendments were inadvertently not introduced by the time the House prorogued. The amendments are intended to ensure that County Court judges, when acting as local judges of the Court of Queen's Bench, have full jurisdiction on all Family Law matters. The amendments to The County Courts Act itself will permit the County Court to utilize the se rvices of the Public Trustee as official guardian in cases involv ing infants. These provisions, Mr.

Speaker, are similar to the present provisions of The Queen's Bench Act. Finally, the amendments to The Surrogate Courts Act were recommended by the Chief County Court Judge, who is the Chief Judge of the Surrogate Court, to bring some of the monetary values in the Act in line with present day values. Accordingly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would commend this bill to the House. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honou rable Membe r for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honou rable Membe r for Stu rgeon Creek, that debate be adjourned. 2893 MOTION presented and carried. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, there is an agree ment that there will not be a Private Members' Hour today. We will be meeting in two committees; one in the House, a continuation of Crown Investments; and the other committee in committee room on the Emer gency Inte rest Rate Relief. Accordingly, I would move, seconded by the Minis ter of Health, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to con sider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty and that the House do now adjourn. MOTION presented. MATTER OF GRIEVANCE MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is tradi tional in this Assembly that when a motion to go into committee is made, that is the time when a member can rise and bring to the attention of the House mat ters which he considers to be of fairly important nature. That is why, Mr.

Speaker, at this time I have chosen this occasion to bring to the attention of the Government House Leader and members of the gov ernment some of the rather strange and inept goings on that appear to be taking place and what I consider to be the total lack of leadership that is occurring here

Tuesday, 1 June, 19 82 in this province at this time. Mr. Speaker, I give you an example. It was on the 29th of April, which is more than a month away, there was a debate going on and I took the adjou rnment on a motion that was on the Order Paper, is still on the Order Paper, and here we are, five weeks later, and I still haven't had an opportunity to speak to that motion. Five weeks, Mr. Deputy Speaker, five whole weeks have gone past and the government has not called that resolution. The resol ution was the one that was proposed by the Honour able Minister of Trans portation which says:

Whereas the Government of Canada has announced its intention to abolish the statutory rates for rail transportation of grain and introduce a law designed to protect the railroads; and WHERE AS research conducted for the preceding Government of Manitoba indicates that increased grain rates are expected to result in a decline in the value of agricultural production, will certainly result in lower net farm income and will therefore result in a loss of jobs; and WHER EAS the protection of a grain rate set by statute has proven superior to all other "g uarantees" of rail rates and service ...

It goes on and on and on, Mr. Speaker. The part that concerns me is that some of those Whereases are questionable. Some of the proposals, I think, are debatable, but unfortunately we haven't had the opportunity to debate -(Inte rjection )- the Honour able Minister says it is not true. I would suggest to the honourable member that he has to listen because the Government House Leader, in his collective wisdom, has decided not to call the resolution.

I have great difficulty with that because I'm sure that it causes a lot of embarrassment to him in his relationship with his Leader -(l nterjection )- he has to, because his Leader urged everyone in this Assembly to debate. I refer to the Hansard of the 22nd of April when the First Minis ter spoke. I want to quote a little piece from this. This is on page 1739, about half way up the column, "and I would hope that members would join quickly in a unanimo us vote on this resolut ion." I wish, Mr.

Speaker, that we would see some remo val of the hesitation that has been taking place over the last few weeks on this resolut ion that is before us, so we can get on with a clear message to Ottawa. What has happened, Mr. Speaker? What has hap pened? I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that there was an election in Saskatchewan and since that election this government won't touch this resolut ion with a ten foot pole. They're trying an 11-'lz right now, but they're not to sure if that will work.

The Honourable Minister of Cooperative Develop ment, and I use that word advisedly, says, "Well, let's get on with it." I'm asking him, please get on with it, get to your Government Ho use Leader and have him call the resolution. We on this side of the House have been waiting patiently, but obvio usly there has to be some problems between the Government Ho use Leader and the First Minister, because the First Minister has indicated in Hansard that he wants this thing called. "Let's get on with it, so we can get a clear message to Ottawa," and the Government House Leader won't call the resolution. Mr.

Speaker, it doesn't show any leadership at all, nor does it instill any confidence in the people of this province to have this type of activi ties and shenanigans going on. Mr. Speaker, I just quoted one passage from the First Minister's speech. He also says, "I think, Mr. Speaker, that members across can indeed make a contribution to the quality of life in this province and far can exceed the num ber game that has taken place and which is gu iding bu reaucratic decision makers." Now that doesn't make sense, but there are many things that the First Minister says that don't make sense.

I think that the towns and villages of Manitoba are a good place to live and work, to raise a family, to carry on a bus iness. I think there could even be better pla ces to work and live, but not if we lose one of the major sources of a local indu stry in this fashion and that is the grain elevator. He goes on and on and then he says at the bottom of page 1739, "I fail to understand the hesitation that has taken place so far on the part of Opposition Members in this Chamber regarding this resolution." Well, Mr.

Speaker, I want to point out to the First Minister, that hesitation is not on this side of the Hou se, it's in his own party. It's in his own Government Ho use Leader. Apparently he can't even read the Order Paper because the resolution has been on the Order Paper for months, and he won't call it. Why? Why, Mr. Speaker? Why? Why would he not call it? He says "It is beyond me as to this hesitation, this uncertainty, this indeci siveness that is being demonstrated day by day across the way," but we know that it's right over there. Mr.

Speaker, when it comes to do this, when the Trudeau Government and the railways say, "Jump," is there anyone in this Chamber that is going to ask, "H ow high?" I imagine Howard is going to say that. He says "Mr. Speaker, I hope we can vote on this resol u tion this week and give a clear indication of the posi tion of members in this Chamber." This was the 22nd of April, a Thur sday. 2894 Now I think that on the following Monday there was an event of some significance in a neighboring pro vince.

I have a sus picion, and it could be wrong, but I have a suspicion that the only purpose in bringing forward this resolution was to bolster the sagging forces of the Blakeney Government in Saskatchewan. Mr. Speaker, I come to that conclusion because they have failed to call this resolution since that disastro us day, that Black Monday in socialist circles that occurred in Saskatchewan. Mr. Speaker, some of the interesting things that were said by the First Minister make interesting read ing. There was an interjection and then the First Minis ter went on, he says, "Mr.

Speaker, I'm coming to th at." I was amazed to hear the Leader of the Opposi tion suggest that we do not want to vote until after the Saskatchewan election. Now, I am convinced that the First Minister was telling the truth. He wanted that vote on the Crow rate before the Saskatchewan election, not after, so that my leader was probably quite correct when he said that we didn't want to vote until after the Saskatchewan election. I think that was probably true. I sometimes wonder, Mr.

Speaker, whether it is wise for other jurisdictions to attempt unduly to influence the results of an election in another juri sdiction. That is something that a socialist will never accept because they love to gather their hordes, traipse across the count ry from one juris diction to the next and put their election bandwagon on the road. They use the same

Tuesday, 1 June, 19 82 one from one jurisdiction to another, so I don't think that they would probably accept my suggestion that we refrain from trying to influence the vote in another jurisdiction. Mr. Speaker, the First Minister went on. He says, "What is the Leader of the Opposition afraid of, Mr. Speaker? In Saskatchewan as here, we are stating that until there is a superior alternative, the Crow rate must stay. We are saying that the Pepin proposal is not a superior alternative." Mr. Speaker, I don't think that's what they were saying at all.

They were saying that they wouldn't even sit down at the table and talk about it. They were saying they would refuse to negotiate. This is the party that talks about MR. G. FILMON: Open government. MR. H. GRAHAM: ... not only that, but trying to get along in a better frame of mind with the Federal Government, but said we will not negotiate; we won't even talk to you, but we believe in cooperative federal ism. Mr. Speaker, that somehow has a hollow ring to it. Somehow it has a very hollow ring. Mr.

Speaker, the First Minister ended up and he says, "I ask again for the Opposition to join with us in agreeing to that latter proposition. Today, I ask that you agree to it- this week." He was pleading with this House to get on with this resolution. If you wish to show your support for Mr. Devine in the Province of Saskatchewan, show it. Demonstrate that Mr. Devine is sincere when he says that the Conservative Party supports the Crow; demonstrate your sincerity. Why is the First Minister always concerned about Saskat chewan?

It seemed very strange and a very hollow argument that he put forward in his so-called defence of the resolution put forward by the Minister of Transportation. "I say to the members opposite," he says, "by cast ing your votes in the Manitoba Legislature this week, today or tomorrow, let it show them, Mr. Speaker, with our feet and our votes ... " Now, I don't know what he's using his feet for - probably putting them in his mouth. " ... with our feet and our votes where we stand.

Let us remove all hesitation, all doubt as to where this House unanimously stands in respect to the retention of the Crow rate." That was a very anxious Premier wanting to get on with the business. Well, Mr. Speaker, how much can you believe that man? He stood up and made those dynamic decisive speeches and then "poof," we don't even see the resolution for five whole weeks. Mr. Speaker, I rise at this time to express my con cern and what I consider to be an issue, a grave issue, for this Legislature.

I think it is particularly approp riate today when just a few minutes ago, we paid tribute to one of the great servants of this Assembly who believed in the orderly conduct of business of this Assembly. This is all I'm asking for, Mr.

Speaker, is the orderly conduct of the business of this Assembly so that we can proceed on a regular basis, that we know with some degree of certainty when something is put on the Order Paper that, indeed, it will come forward for debate and members of this Assembly can prop erly take their place in debate in this Chamber and the business of the House conducted in an orderly fashion. So, Mr.

Speaker, I rise at this time because this is the proper time according to the rules of our Assembly to bring this matter before the House for its attention and I ho pe that, as a result. we will conduct the affairs of the House in an orderly manner and this resolution will be called very shortly. So I thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon . J. Walding: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I too wish to add my voice and use that one occasion that all members have to express ourselves on a matter of House grievance, and to add my total and utter dis gust for the cynicism and the contempt that the New Democratic Party has shown towards rural Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I want to first of all, of course, congrat ulate the Member for Virden ... MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minister of Agricul ture on a point of order. HON. B. URUSKI: The point of order that I rise on, Mr.

Speaker, it is highly unusual for the Honourable Member for Lakeside to get up in his place and say that he hasn't had an opportunity or speak about dis grace when he has spoken on this issue, Mr. Speaker, when he has already had the opportunity to speak on this issue. MR. SPEAKER: I doubt if the Honourable Minister had a point of order. The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: It's obvious that the expressions of contempt I have for that party opposite still hasn't sunk in, but I want to tell you, Mr. Speaker, it will sink into the hearts and minds of rural Manitobans.

First of all, I want to congratulate the Member for Virden for having patiently waited thus long to raise this matter of grievance - and we are speaking on a matter of grievance and for the edification of the newer members here, it is up to the House Leader to call the Orders of the Day and to call the Resolution of the Day and this resolution has been on the Order Paper of these past five weeks.

The Member for Virden has quoted the eloquent passages of our First Minis ter, of our Premier, about the importance of the urgency of this subject matter; about how this matter should be dealt with; the goading that went on from other members opposite about not failing to deal with this matter. 2895 Now, Mr. Speaker, because it has become so evi dent that everybody - and certainly every farmer in Manitoba - can understand why that motion was here to begin with, that it was crass politics played at its meanest and basest and lowest level that was being demonstrated here by the New Democrats. And, Mr.

Speaker, rural Manitoba won't forget that because the issue is important; the issue is legitimate; the issue is of great concern to rural Manitobans. But they're pre pared to play that kind of cheap politics with this kind of an issue. Mr. Speaker, other speakers have said in the first instance, although the issue - and I think it's a legiti-

Tuesday, 1 June, 1982 mate issue to debate in this Chamber - but the issue of the Crow is not of all that much importance to Mani toba, as compared to Saskatchewan and even Alberta, just in the sense of where most of our grain moves to. It moves to the Eastern seaboard - 80 percent, 90 percent - and that's not where the problem lies but, Mr. Speaker, nonetheless, we have every reason to asso ciate ourselves with the concerns of our two sister prairie provinces, Sas katchewan and Alberta, where the Crow really is of fundamental importance. Mr.

Speaker, I want you to at least examine with me for a moment the callousness, the cyn icism of the New Democrats who believed they could manufacture a political issue out of this issue and they were so advised because that is what Mr. Blakeney, the former Premier of Saska tchewan, believed, and he was advised that he could manufacture an elect ion issue for him on th is issue.

So he pic ked up the phone and he called his friend "Po wder Puff Pawley" here in Manitoba and he said, "Pa wley, you remember I need a favour because, you know, I may be able to help you with that potash mine that you want to devel op." He thought he might be able to. I don't know whether Grant Devine's going to have those same cons idera tions at this particular time. In the meantime, of course, we've probably - in the words of the Member for Virden - "pool ed" away the one opportunity that we had for the major potash development in this province.

Nonetheless, in a coldly calculated, cynical way the NDP of Saskatchewan got together with the NDP of Manitoba and said, hey, if you can box the Tories in in Manit oba, particularly if you can get some of those Tory members to make some speeches that could in some way be mis interpreted by the electorate as being opposed to some of the positions being taken on this issue or in recogn izing that some change might have to take place with respect to how grain is transported in Manit oba, it would be of help.

It would be of help, not to the farmers in Man itoba, not so much to the farmers in Sas katchewan, but to the political fo rtunes of the New Democratic Party in Saskatchewan. Mr. Speaker, that was what mot ivated that resolu tion, and that alone is what mot ivated that resolut ion. Mr. Speaker, need we have any other demonstrat ion of that? The Hon ourable Member for Virden laid it out as clear as it can be laid on. Up until the election date, the call was on: let's deal with this motion; let's deal with this motion.

Now for five weeks, it sat there - no urgency, no importance - after all, the election is over in Saskatchewan. You cynical politicians! I want to tell you something. The farmers of Mani toba will not forget this and you will never get any more representat ion of rural Manit oba, from the clear headed think ing of Manitoba that you have now, because you're prepared to play with such an impor tant thing as the farmers and rural Manitoba's liveli hood in a cynical party way. So, Mr.

Speaker, these, fortunately for us in the Conservative Party, are some of those God-given opportunities that will enable us to continue to enhance ourselves to our rural voters. We'll cont inue to keep our base in rural Manitoba because we will not play games of politics like that when our people's welfare is at stake. Mr. Spea ker, the mover of the resolut ion isn't here. Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry. I withdraw that remark. We're not supposed to make references to members who aren't here, but, Mr. Spea ker, what did we have going on prior to the Saskatchwan elect ion?

Every day taunting and goading from the members oppo site. At public taxpayers' expense, we put advertise ments into the Manitoba Co- operator, inserts, or we had big meetings lined up. We had halls ordered for 400 chairs to be set up, ashtrays for 350 people - some might share - and four farmers showed up, Mr. Speaker. Well, embarrassingly, Mr. Speaker, the hon ourable government had to withdraw from that cha rade, but the point that I'm trying to make is they were prepared to go to this end. They were prepared to orchestrate to this end the politics out of the question of the Crow. Mr.

Speaker, I did hot know that my colleague, the Member for Virden's patience would run out and that he would present that motion today, or else I would have phoned Grant Devine's office in Saskatchewan. I'm sure there must be thousands of those ill conceived, hard to read, dead Crow badges around that all members opposite used to run around this Legislative Chamber wearing. You know, that picture of that magpie turned upside down with an arrow through - you know where. Remember, we all wore that? 2896 That was five weeks ago, Mr. Speaker.

Five weeks ago when the Premier of this province thought that the Crow was an urgent pressing matter, had to be dealt with, challenged us. We had to deal with this matter, the very livelihood of rural Manitoba. Rural Sas katch ewan was stood in balance whether or not we'll depopulate all of rural Manit oba, whether or not farmers are going to be in worse economic conditions than they already are. Those were the speeches that were emanating a short five weeks ago on this subject matter. Now, Mr. Speaker, they have no concern. They have absolutely no concern.

The polit ical little game they played went poof in their face and so along with it went the issue. I hope particularly the newer members, those few that have at least a peripheral of rural and farm-based support, recognize what took place in this Chamber because you're going to have to answer for it. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you something, we are pre pared to debate the Crow. We will now debate the Crow and we'll debate the Crow until the crow can't fly any more or at least until it gets its arrow out of wher ever it was. But, Mr.

Speaker, I couldn't resist the opportunity of using up my one opportunity in this Sessio n to express again my dis gust. I haven't seen politics played in such a blatant, in such a callous, in such a crass way. For a political party I've seen individual members from time to time and we all have to do it, we are all politic ians - to see a whole party play this kind of politics for sheer party politics reasons and use, Mr. Speaker - and this is the unforgi vable part - use such an important issue that grain transportation is in this country.

That is what they are prepared to do and they will have to live with that, Mr. Speaker, because five weeks have gone by and there hasn't been one indication on the part of the Government House Leader, whose responsibility it is to call the resolution.

The resolution stood on the Order Paper every day in those five weeks. Every day in those five weeks, the Government House Leader could have called for that resolution. Not once, Sir, was it called until, as I say, our patience has run out and we used up our grie vance motions to make this point. Shame on you for treating farmers and rural Manitobans in the manner, in the way in which you have. You are nothing but crass, callous, cynical, contemptuous politicians. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S.

ASHTO N: On a point of order, for the clarifica tion of members opposite who suggested that there was no debate after the Saskatchewan election, I, in fact, spoke on the Crow following the Saskatchewan election. MR. SPEAKER: I doubt that was a point of order, but I thank the honourable member for his clarification. QUES TION put, MOTION carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honour able Member for Flin Flon in the Chair for Crown Investments and the Honourable Member for The Pas for Emergency Interest Rate Relief.

The House adjourned and stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. tomorrow (Wednesd ay). CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - EMERGENCY INTEREST RATE RELIEF MR. CHAI RMAN, H. Harapiak: I call the Committee to order. We are on Emergency Interest Rate Relief Pro gram on Page 116 of our Estimates Book. Mr. Minister, do you have an opening statement? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to bring members up-to-date on the program. When the program was announced in February, there were three components to the program.

The parameters were a $23 million Interest Rate Relief Program for homeowners, for farmers and for small businesses, the various components of which were: For homeowners, there were direct subsidies to a maximum of $275 per month whose gross incomes were $30,000 or less and whose principal, interest and taxes exceeded the 30 percent of their income. For farmers, whose gross receipts were less than $70,000 in 1981, or in the last two of the last three years, would qualify for up to $6,000 per year.

The statistical advice that we received in this area was from the Farm Credit Corporation in terms of net incomes of farmers of Manitoba of which an estimate was given to us that at least 70 percent of Manitoba farmers fell into that category. In terms of the small businesses, businesses with gross receipts of less than $350,000 in 1981 or in two of the last three years qualified for the same type of assistance as in the case of farmers.

Some 80 percent of Manitoba businesses fell into the category of the gross receipt range that I have outlined. 1 June, 1982 The assistance to small business and to farmers was a 50 percent grant and a 50 percent repayable loan, which will be interest-free for the maximum 24-month period, and the time frame for applications was any time between January 1, 1982 and December 31, 1983. The assistance would run for a maximum 24-month period. MR. CHAI RMAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I would think that the Minister's opening statement is somewhat a little briefer than what I thought it may be.

I thought the Minister may have made quite a lot more to-do about this Interest Rate Relief Program that he made a lot of noise about prior to the election and the fact that his initial job after the election was to head up and chair what would be considered one of the major commit tees of any government, because I think that if we were to ask the question throughout not only the farm community, but dealing with the homeowners and dealing with the small business people, what was the major concern within society and their economic problems that we all know they're having? What would be their No. 1 concern?

Of course, interest rates are one of the major issues. I think that interest rates and energy costs are two of the costs that we have had to deal with that have, I would say, to put it in strong terms, Mr. Chairman, nearly crippled the farm community. 2897 It is unfortunate that the Minister, who is now some several months old in office and still the Chairman of the Interest Rate Relief Program, hasn't given us spe cific details of how many farmers have had cash pay outs made to them, how many homeowners have had cash pay outs made to them, how many small busi nesses have had direct cash assistance.

That I think, Mr. Chairman, is critical. I think that the fact the Minister has announced $23 million over two years and we're now voting $10 mil lion, the fact that $10 million for three groups in society to deal with a massive interest rate problem is by no means adequate unless, Mr. Chairman, the Min ister has introduced a program to again try and fool the people because I think that's what we've seen happen in the administration of this date.

We've seen a program, we've seen a Budget introduced that said that it's a tax that everybody is going to pay; it's a 1.5 percent payroll tax and that's really not going to hurt anybody. That's, you know, because we tax churches and because we tax charitable organizations and everyone has to now pay 1.5 percent that, for some reason, is a better way of taxing people. But what we're seeing is, again, the Chairman of the Interest Rate Relief Program trying to fool the people. There are 30,000 farmers in the province and I'll speak specifically, Mr. Chairman, about the farm community.

There are 30,000 farmers in Manitoba; they're having problems with interest rate relief or with interest rate costs. I would say the majority, Mr. Chairman, of farmers are borrowing money to operate their businesses with. HON. B. URUSKI: And they always have. MR. J. DOWNEY: Oh, Mr. Chairman.

Tuesday, 1 June, 1982 HON. B. URUSKI: What else is new? MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, the Minister is very much ill-advised. They have certainly borrowed money, but at what rate have they had to borrow it at? They've had to borrow it at 5 - I can remember trad i tionally the cost of the farm community was 5 percent. I remember it increasing to 6, 7, 8, 9 percent and then it went to 1 O percent and it was a critical situation, really. At 10 percent with normal operations it got into a, not critical, but it started to get tightening up a little. In the last year, Mr.

Chairm an, a year, not two years, no, in the last year we have seen interest rates go to excess of 20 percent, in excess of 20 percent, interest rates in excess of 20 percent and, Mr. Chairman, I think that what the Minister has done is grossly mis led the people of Manitoba, leading them to believe, first of all, that if they voted for him and voted for his party, they would do something to assist them and that is a No. 1 sin, Mr. Chairman, in my estimation. Grossly misleading the people of Manitoba, to lead them to believe that he could help them and his party could help them with interest rate problems.

I think, Mr. Chairman, what we have seen happen is an admission that he can't, that the problem of the interest rate is far too massive for he as the Minister or a government to do anything about. If we get into the spec ific details, Mr. Chairman, of the actua1 programs that they introduced - and let's just touch on the farm one for a few minutes - I think it's important to the committee and to me, as an indi vidual who is from the farm community, to really assess what does a $3,000 grant mean to an indiv idual who is paying 20 percent interest?

An average farm size - I'm sure the department people are sitting here, they can tell the Minister if I'm wrong - is 680 acres or between 650 and 700 acres in the Province of Mani toba, that the HON. B. URUSKI: The average farm size is 400. The average farm size in Manitoba is 400 plus. MR. J. DOWNEY: I guess we can go to the Agriculture Department's Annual Report and I stand to be cor rected. For some reason I had a feeling it was around a

section of land, but I do stand to be corrected. He can get those figures easier than I can probably, but the point I am trying to make, Mr. Chairman, is the min ute amount of money, and it is a mi nute amount of money, that he is offering to support the interest rate problem that farmers have, is of no meaning. What does $3,000 mean to an indiv idual who is paying - and if we want to use the Minister's figure - if he's got a 400-acre farm average, the cost of putting in that particular farm or operating it today is probably in the neighbourhood of $50 to $75 an acre.

If he is borrowing his operating credit and the Minis ter said, every farmer borrows money, it is not uncommon. He borrows his operating cred it. -( Interje ction)- The Member for Dauphin, Mr. Chairman, will have his chance to speak I would hope. Mr. Chairman, we will look at the figures of 400 acres at $50 an acre to be fair and I think that's not a way out figure, that's a minimum figure. That is $20,000 operat ing cred it; 20 percent interest on that is how much money? Twenty percent interest on that much money is $4,000.00. Fifty times the 400 is an interest charge of $4,000.00. Mr.

Chairman, that has doubled in the last year, year-and-a-h alf's time, something that the farmer has not had any control of. So, if you are going to help the 30,000 farmers in Manitoba in any meaningf ul way, the $10 million that he is asking for the homeowners, asking for the farmers and asking for the busin ess people isn't going to help them. So, why has he fooled them, Mr. Chair man? Why is he trying to fool them? I ind icated in my opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, that I would hope the Minister would have, first of all, given us the numbers of farmers that he has helped.

I would hope that he would, first of all, respond with those answers. To date, how much money has flowed into the hands of farmers as far as the program that he has put in place? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Cha irman, before I answer those questions spec ifically, I think the Honourable Member for Arthur, if anyone is mis leading or stretch ing things, it's the Honourable Member for Arthur who comes to this committee and has the audacity to say that someone is fool ing someone.

It is only the Member for Arthur who can come to this commi ttee and try to hoodwink members here and the people of Manitoba into believing that someone is fool ing someone. Mr. Chairm an, one should rememb er - let's go back to the election campaign - that the Conservative Party while in office supported, through their admin istra tion, the high interest rate policies of the Federal Gove rnment. It was their Minister of Finance. Did they pledge anything to assist the people of Manitoba at that time? No, they did not, they did not have any programs. But when did they come up with a program, Mr. Chairman?

During deathbed repentance; that there should be something done on account of the high interest rates while they were in government, during the election campaign. They made an announcement that there should be some Interest Rate Relief Program and that after we had made announcements that we would have a limited program and it was announced as a lim ited program. 2898 I believe during the campaign it was a $20-million range that was announced during the campaign. I don't have the literature right in front of me but I'm sure that the $20-m illion figure was put out as a defini tive amount.

One realizes that $20 million isn't a great amount, Mr. Chairman, in terms of monies for mort gages and the like, but the Conservatives realized that they were in trouble and on a deathbed repentance they came out with a suggestion that they were also going to come up with an Interest Rate Relief Pro gram. But was there going to be any assis tance for farmers or small busi ness people? No, there was no assist ance and now for the Honourable Member for Arth ur to come to this committee and say that you're not doing enough, you're not doing anything, why are you fooling the people, Mr. Chairman?

The same Minister of the former admin istration who told beef producers that there isn't enough support, that there's not going to be any assis tance to them, is now coming to this committee and saying, you're not doing enough. When they were in office when the interest rates were above the 20 percent range - he

admitted to us here this afternoon that interest rates hit the 20 percent mark - they have the gall now to come here and say that you're foo ling the people of Manitoba and that somehow your program isn't working. We announced it as limited assistance, Mr. Chair man, we were not overly optimistic that we could help everyone and we made that announcement with respect to this program, that it was of limited assis tance and that we could not help everyone, recogniz ing that interest rates have made in many operations, including farming, make up a major portion of farmers' payments. But, Mr.

Chairman, let's also recognize some of the difficulties of who is in trouble in the farming sector. It is many of those people that the former administration assisted in purchasing large tracts of land. -( Interjection )- No one said that you shouldn't buy land, Mr. Chairman, but with the financing ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Order. MR. B.

URU SKI: .. . their administration, in fact, placed many people by their dogmatic approach by saying, yes, we will do away with the Land Lease Program; we will not allow people to lease land and pay a reasonable rental rate; we will jack up the rates; we will change the rating structure according to market value and the rates will then skyrocket so it will make it actually financially attractive for people to go ahead and buy that land. Mr. Chairman, who do we have now, some of the people who are in financial difficulty?

Those who swung over to purchase their lands and got caught up in the high interest rate squeeze and many of those will be and are in financial difficulty; and some of whom, Mr. Chairman, I am now receiving letters from them and from other people saying, look, the only way that I can survive is if the Province of Manitoba takes this large debt load off me. -( Interjecti on)- That's correct. As a matter of fact the Member for Emerson says, buy it back.

That is exactly the type of letters that I have been receiving, saying, look, if I and my family are to remain on the farm, one way of surviving as a family unit on the farm is by taking this debt load off us and refinancing my operation and being able to lease, in effect, banking their land, Mr. Chairman. That is correct. I have received letters to that effect. - (Interjec tion)- Mr. Chairman, I have a letter that I have received -( Interjecti on)- a letter, yes, I have. Well, Mr. Chairman, it is an example and I tell the honourable member it is an example of people who are concerned. Well, Mr. Chairman MR.

CHAIRMAN: Order . HON. B. URUSKI: ... Mr. Chairman, the honourable members may not like what they hear but the fact of the matter is, there are many people in financial diffi culty and the ... MR. CHA IRMAN: Order. I believe the Minister gave the Member for Arthur the courtesy of listening to his presentation and I believe the Member for Arthur should be able to listen to what the Minister has to say about that. 1 June, 1982 HON. B. URUSKI: It's not Arthur, it's MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, please. MR.

CHAIRMAN: I am referring to the members in the com mittee who are disturbing and I'm sure they are disturbing your hearing. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, there has been an accusation made by you, as Chairman, that I am inter rupting the proceedings of the committee. You named the Member for Arthur, Mr. Chairman, and I would hope that you would correct the record. I have not. MR. CHAIR MAN: I did not name the Member for Arthur, I said the Minister listened to the Member for Arthur's presentation and I ... MR. J.

DOWNEY: I believe you left the impression that I was the person who was making that noise and I would hope that you would correct the record. MR. CHAIRMAN: I will correct the record and say that the Member for Arthur was listening very diligently. Mr. Minister. HON. B. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I menti oned to the members of this committee that I received a letter. I am also advised, Mr. Chairman, specifically to my office, that the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation has received a number of letters to that effect as well.

But I have received a letter to my own office, directed to myself, from a farmer in Manitoba putting forward directly that kind of a request. But, Mr. Chairman, it is members of the Conservative Party who come here and have the audacity to insinuate and intimidate members and the public and to insinuate that someone is fooling the public of Manitoba that this program was going to be the salvation of Manito bans who Were in difficulty with interest rates. Mr. Chairman, we have never pretended that would be the case.

We have indicated that this program is of limited assistance and it will assist as many Manitobans as we can in terms of this program. 2899 With respect to the farm aspect of the program and I will speak to that specifically, Mr. Chairman, and my colleagues can speak to the other areas.

Not only are we assisting farmers with respect in applying for the Interest Rate Relief Program, those farmers who do not qualify, who may have larger equity in their opera tions have a greater cash flow - or other areas- we are through our staff providing management assistance, financial advice and trying to provide whatever assis tance from the department that we can to people who are in financial difficulty. This is a foll ow-up program in terms of assisting the farmers of Manitoba. To date, Mr.

Chairman, we've approved 102 applica tions; 50 of these have got a confirmed line of credit and there are about 150 to 200 more to process. To date, these approvals represent approximately $600,000 of interest payment advances and are inter est free for two years. Now, this amount of money will facilitate approximately $2 million. That is a very con servative figure on the low side of new operating credit, advanced mostly from private lending institu-

Tuesda y,1 June, 1982 lions, but some are under consideration by MACC as a result of these approvals. I say new lending credit, it is not debt consolidation or other areas. So, Mr. Chairman, MACC as well has a number of those applicants and are in a process of considering providing operating loans in some of these cases to farmers who have been rejected by private lending institutions. About $300,000 of these interest pay ments will be an outright grant and not have to be repaid. Mr.

Chairman, there have been representations made to myself by the Farm Bureau and other members that the limit of $70,000 gross income should be revised. I have indicated to the honourable members that if the number of applications drop off in the near future, in terms of the eligibility, that kind of an assessment will be undertaken to make sure that the amount of money that we have programmed, the slack will be able to be taken up by changes in the criteria if that is in fact necessary. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, it is interesting to hear the Minister want to go back over the previous few years of our administration to discuss some of the programs and policies that were put in place. I don't mind getting into that debate, I can defend everything we've done ... HON. B. URUSKI: Or not done. MR. J. DOWNEY: . .. in the farm community. The Minister speaks from his chair again and says, things we have not done. One thing, Mr. Chairman, we did not do, and that was last fall in the election, was make promises that we couldn't live up to. That, Mr.

Chair man, is where this Minister is going to and has lost face with the farm community. That, Mr. Chairman, is a very serious fault that he has made because the farm community have traditionally operated on trust and good faith and believing in the word of a person who is representing them in this Assembly, but we haven't had that. We haven't had that. I will just use a few figures, Mr. Chairman.

There is a Minister of Agriculture in the Province of Manitoba who has a responsibility of representing and spea king for, now that he's the chairman of this committee, 30,000 farmers who have had problems with interest rate. There is no question that every farmer out in the community - not every but almost every farmer - has had a difficulty with high interest rates. He has been told by the present Minister of Agriculture that he's doing something about it. Let me tell you, we are voting $10 million today, Mr.

Chairman, that if the Minister of Agriculture sat down with a cheque book and wrote a cheque to every farmer; how much would that be to every farmer? $333 dollars to every farmer, of which, Mr. Chairman, he would ask for half of it to come back. $333 today, Mr. Chairman -( Interjec tion )- Well, I know, but what I'm saying, Mr. Chairman A MEMBER: Hold it. You can't give it all away to the farmers. MR. J. DOWNEY: Oh, can't I? Now my colleagues are saying we can't give it all to the farmers.

So that $333 that every farmer is expecting to get because we are voting $10 million, if every homeowner expects the same share and every small business expects a share, what are we going to be down to? A $3.30 - and I've said it in my comments in the House and I'll say it again - that I'll bet you, Mr. Chairman, I will wager that the cost of administration, the cost of the Civil Service and the administration is going to eat up more money and cost more to administer than the farmers are going to see out of this program.

They've been misled to the point where today every farmer in the province is expecting some form of interest rate relief to come from their Minister of Agri culture. That's what I'm hearing in the country, Mr. Chairman. I'm hearing it in the country because farmers are saying, we have a Minister of Agriculture who is committed to help us with our interest rate problems. But where is it coming, when is it coming? Well, now, Mr. Chairman, after today's Committee meeti ng, we have $10 million we're voting and I have to say if every farmer were to get a share of that, it would be $333.00.

But my colleague, the critic for Industry and Economic Development and the Minister responsible for Housing says, you can't have it all for the farm community. So now we have to say that it is shrin king, to what point? So we're really saying what I said initially that the program is a "Mickey Mouse" program. It's of no meaning at all; it is a "Mickey Mouse" program. It's of no meaning at all to the farm community. And he is sitting here, has misled, Mr. Chairman, the people to believe that is a meaningful program and it isn't, that there is money coming and there isn't. You know, this, Mr.

Chairman, is not the only example of misleading the farm community. The beef industry have had the same kind of leader ship from him, you know, pretending that they're going to get some form of relief. They didn't get that kind of false pretensions, Mr. Chairman, from our government but if he wants to talk about some of the things, there were some real help programs put in place. When we had a drought problem, we put some money on the table and we didn't put a bureaucracy in the road of them getting it. We, Mr. Chairman, put adequate funds in a program for them to use and we did. Mr.

Chairman, we reviewed the Crop Insurance Corporation and we fine-tuned it so that the people who are in need of a program had the suppor t of that program. We put changes in place. When the grain industry - we had tons of grain, half the grain lying on the prairies, Mr. Chairman - we committed millions of dollars, $2.-some million to leasing of hopper cars to put in the grain system to move it to get funds for the farmers. You know that happened immediately; we didn't wait. You know, they give us criticism about dragging our feet; that was done immediately, Mr. Chairman. 2900 What did they do, Mr. Chairman?

My colleagues, the Member for Lakeside and the Member for Virden, today ... MR. CHAI RMAN: Order. MR. J. DOWNEY: rose on grievances and I'm pleased they did, because what did they do? They pointed out just exactly what this government is play-

ing and that's a cheap political game with the farm community. I will not stand or sit as a member for this, representing a farm constituency, Mr. Chairman. I, Mr. Chairman, will not stand or sit and allow the farm community to be used as a political football. That's what they're doing - they're using the farm community as a football, a political football, and we can't stand for it, Mr. Chairman. They talk about the programs that were in place. Certainly, Mr.

Chairman, interest rates have been increasing gradually over the last two years, in fact, not gradually, they've gone up what I would call exor bitant rates and that's an unknown factor that the farm community haven't been able to protect themselves against, not unlike, Mr. Chairman, the weather condi tions that they weren't able to protect themselves against. We put $40 million in place to protect that farm community. What has this government done? This government put $10 million in place to protect the farm community; to protect the homeowners; to protect small business people.

You know, I think it speaks for itself, Mr. Chairman. I don't know why we're sitting in here debating a program that is of no mean ing to anyone. All we're doing is further perpetuating the election promise they're supporting through public funds, the election promise of the NOP Government. They're continually hanging a carrot out saying that there is some relief; it's a promise that is not the truth. I hate to be a member of any committee that supports that kind of a program. Three groups in society, Mr. Chairman - $10 mil lion? It's a game they're playing. It's a game they're playing, Mr.

Chairman, and I don't think we can stand for it. The Minister still, to this point, his Premier indi cated that it was an Emergency Interest Rate Relief Program. The Minister is telling us about all those people he saved. He's got 102 approved; a confirmed line of credit of 50; 150 to 200 to process. Well, pretty small, Mr. Chairman, pretty minute in the overall problem. Has the Minister of Agriculture in the Province of Manitoba contacted his federal counterpart?

You know, we heard last night, the Federal Minister of Energy announced a major program to revitalize the energy industry, the petroleum industry, because $2 billion - they're in trouble. Mr. Chairman, does this Minister of Agriculture ever sit down and let the Fed eral Government know the economic plight of the farm community? You know, how can he sit by and allow that kind of $2 billion? I'm not against it, but is he not putting the case of the Manitoba farmer before the National Government, before the major body that has the kind of power and control -(I nterjection )- oh, our Premier has, he says.

Has he sat down and really said to the Federal Minister of Agriculture, if you don't get off your milkstool and get with it, we're not going to have a farm community left to generate the grain that is adding to the wealth of this country. Again, Mr. Chairman, if it wasn't for the grain mov ing down the Great Lakes system in this country today, there would be nothing happening in this coun try. There is not a pound of iron ore coming back up that system. The raw materials that we traditionally ship out are not moving because of the stagnation of the depression in our economy.

Agriculture is number 2901 one, and who is using it to their advanta ge? It isn't this Minister to the advanta ge of the farm community. He's sitting back sayin g, we've got $10 million to divide amongst three groups of people and we'll leave it at that; we'll play games. Mr. Chairman, I'm terribly disappointed in what we're sitting here debating.

It's a meaningless pro gram and I guess the answer that I have to the farm community is, we have a Minister who is prepared to give you $333 - no, that's not correct - we have a Minister who would have given you $333 but there's now two other groups in society that have to share. You know, so it's a game; I have to refer to is as a "Mickey Mouse" program and I just, Mr. Chairman, can't understand why the Minister would have ever allowed himself to get trapped into an election prom ise and to further perpetuate that election promise with a program like he's introduced today. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr.

Chairman, the Honourable Member for Arthur is as full of air as he always, always is. He comes to this Committee stampeding and indi catin g, for example, he used the snow that the Federal Government has announced a $2 billion program to revitalize the oil industry. The industry, Mr.

Chairman, that has blackmailed the people of this country and which has been supported by both Liberals and Con servatives, that they should get more money at the expense of the farming community and all people of this country who are forced to pay those - now we're talking about world prices, world energy prices, not 75 percent of world prices - rates that your administra tion supported and still do. The Conservatives want world prices in energy, Mr. Chairman. Even this $2 billion that the member speaks of as being of assistance, I venture to say that nothing will happen in the oil industry.

Because in the United States, the oil industry has had all kinds of incentives from the Reagan administration and, Mr. Chairman, they have closed down exploring in their home coun try and we will pour billions of dollars of incentives to the industry and they will not. They still will hold us to blackmail, Mr. Chairman. They will hold us up to blackmail because it won't be enough, because now that they have gotten the $2 billion, what's the next step? Now, we want world prices for energy. So, Mr.

Chairman, the Member for Arthur who says that the Federal Government has not lived up to their responsibility to the agricultural sector in this coun try, both credit-wise and the like, there is no dis agreement there at all. We have made our views known. I have made my views known in the one Fed eral-Provincial Conference that I was at. We have attempted to have other meetings with them. They have not responded on issues of income stabilization and farm policy.

We hope that there will be a future opportunity and there will be one in the next six weeks that we will have an opportunity to raise these issues again, but for the Member for Arthur to somehow come here as if he was a knight in shining armour as the defender of the farm community, the farmers of Manitoba, his shining armour was somehow rusted out after his four short years in office and he is trying to polish it up and revive the image. In fact, Mr. Chairman, it's highly ironic to have the Conservative members speak so well and so so-c alled

Tuesday, 1 June, 19 82 suppo rtive of the farm community when, in fact, dur ing the four years they were in office, there was virtu ally no assistance to the farm community in terms of really adequately helping farmers with th eir incomes, with the ir assistance, and to come here to this commit tee and say that this program is nothing. Mr. Cha irman, we said that the program was of limited assis tance. We didn't hide that fact when we announced it.

We said that this program was of limited assistance, that it could not help everybody, that we were going to try to help the people who were in the greatest need, although in some of the areas, we might have liked to have greater take-up of the pro gram. But I would have to say if you compared this program even with our neighbours to the east, after four or five months if I recall, in the Province of Onta rio they had an interest rate prog ram and they were having less than 50 applications approved afte r half-a year of the program.

I want to say to the Honourable Member for Arthur that there is no new staff in this component of the program that has been hi red in the Department of Agriculture, Mr. Chai rman. There is no new staff in terms of the agr icultural component. We are using departmental staff in the field. We are using MACC staff and those are the people who are administering the program.

There is clerical staff that has been hi red under the housing component and there are some staff that have been hi red unde r the small busi ness component, but for the members of the Conservative Party to come to Committee and say, well, this is nothing. Well, Mr. Chai rman, in terms of what they proposed to the people of Manitoba, this is a huge program because it does assist and try to assist all sectors of the economy - the homeowner, the small business person and the farming comm unity. What did they propose?

To throw out a few dollars to be spread amongst everyone, to be spread amongst the bulk of mortgage holders and, in fact, if you ana lyze their program, not helping those in greatest need, but trying to spread it out amongst the bulk of mort gage holders. Bring out your program, the one you announced, and do an analysis on it and see who it will help. Take that progr am out and let's examine it, what you proposed, Mr. Chai rman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Tuxedo. MR. J. DOWNEY: Can I not finish my comments? MR. CHAIR MAN: The Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, I want to just fin ish my comments, I think it's impo rtant - if the Member for Tuxedo doesn't mind for a min ute - because the Minis ter has referred to the fact that he had a meeting with the Federal Minister, that he was planning a meeting sometime - he looked at his staff to see - some six weeks down the road. Mr. Chai rman, I want to put on the record, the performance and some of the activities that took place in the last year because of the high interest rates that were affecting the farm commun ity, it's in the Government News Service release that went out May 15th of 1981.

That's just somewhat a year ago, Mr. Chai rman. At that particular time there was a meeting called in Ottawa -the Provincial Ministers requested a meeting with the Fede ral Gove rnment - to point out to the Federal Minister the diffic ulties that the farmers were having with the high interest rate problem. Okay? The Fede ral Minister gave us very little support and indi cated that there was little he could do. MR. CHAI RMAN: Order please. MR. J. DOWNEY: But the point I am trying to make, Mr. Chai rman, is that we did go into the area where the power and control was.

We did tell the Fede ral Minis ter of Agriculture that the farm community were suf fering under th eir high interest rate policy. Mr. Chai r man, we did. We put that point across. All the Ministers were concerned and we made it very clear. Mr. Chai rman, at that same time - and it's in my public press release and I do say to the Minister - (Inte rjection)- it's in the press release if the members are interested in listening or looking it up.

In the mean time, we recommended to the Federal Government, the Federal Agriculture Minister, that the farm com munity be exempt from the Fede ral Government's tax of three to four cents per gallon of fuel which was being used to buy Petrofina and PetroCan stations, a good commonsense approach. Mr. Chai rman, as well, we asked that the producer should be exempt from having to pay the natural gas tax which is adding to the cost of some nit rogen fertilizers made from natural gas. So the Minister sits here saying, what did we do? We, Mr.

Chai rman, a year ago pointed out to the Fed eral Minister the problems that were facing the farm comm unity and identified them as high interest rates and we had, I would say, a good opportunity to put those points across. 2902 Further to that, Mr. Chairman, we can go to the announcements made by the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation, increase the loan rates from $150,000 to $200,000, introduced a debt consolidation program, but we didn't introduce it as this Minister of Agriculture introduced it, that we were going to sup port every farmer and put it in place for everybody. But I'll tell you, Mr.

Chairman, those farmers that went and were accepted did receive some meaningful help. That, Mr. Chai rman, is not happening today. The amount of funds that are available is $10 mil lion, that we are talking about in these Estim ates, are of no meaning at all, not to the farm comm

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-66a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 66a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	88dd464cd30288807a0dfd2f653907f58d9d4f55

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