Manitoba Hansard — 26 July 1988 (Sitting 4, 34th Legislature, 1st Session)

34-1-4

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 First Session - Thirty-Fourth legislature of the legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and OCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 37 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL XXXVII No. 4 - 1:30 p.m., TUESDAY, JUlY 26, 1988. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5492

NAME AlCOCK, Reg ANGUS, John ASHTON, Steve BURRELL, Parker CARR,James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CHARLES, Gwen CHEEMA, Gulzar CHORNOPVSKI, William CONNERY, Edward Hon. COWAN,Jay CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DERKACH, leonard, Hon. DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DRIEDGER, Herold, l. DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry ERNST, Jim, Hon. EVANS, laurie EV.ANS, leonar d FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen Hon. GAUDRY, Neil GlllESHAMMER, Harold GRAY, Avis HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R. HEMPHill, Maureen KOZAK, Richard, J. LAMOUREUX, Kevin, M.

MALOWAY, Jim MANDRAKE, Ed MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. McCRAE, James Hon. MINENKO, Mark MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ThirtyeFourth legis lat ure Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation CONSTI TU ENCY Osborne St. Norbert Thompson Swan River Fort Rouge River Heights Selkirk Kildonan Burrows Portage la Prairie Churchill Ste. Rose du Lac Roblin-Russell Concordia Arthur Em er son Niakwa Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Fort Garry Brandon East Tuxedo Virden St.

Boniface Minnedosa Ellice Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Gimli Logan Transcona lnkster Elmwood Assiniboia Morris Brandon West Seven Oaks MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. Ross.mere OL ESON, Charlotte Hon. Gladstone ORCHARD, Donald Hon. Pembina PANKRATZ, Helmul La Verendrye PATT ERSON, Allan Radisson PENNER, Jack, Hon. Rhine! and PLOHMAN, John Dauphin PRAZNIK, Damm Lac du Bonnet ROCAN, Denis, Hon. Turtle Mountain ROCH, Gilles Springfield ROSE, Bob St. Vital STORIE, Jerry Flin Flon TAVLOR, Harold Wolse!ey URUSKI, Bill lnterlake WASVLYCIA-l!EIS, Judy St.

Johns VEO,Iva Sturgeon Creek PARTY LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP PC LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC NDP NDP PC NDP LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL PC PC PC PC PC LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC PC LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL NDP NDP LIBERAL

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, July 26, 1988. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MESSAGES Mr. Speaker: Before proceeding to Oral Questions, I would like to draw to the att ention of Honourable Members that last Monday, July 18 was the 77th Anniversary of the estab lishment of the Commonwealth Parliament ary Association.

To mark this occasion, I would like to share with the House a message from the Honourable Lavu Mulimba, a Minister of State in the Government of Zambia and chairman of the association's executiv e committee. lt reads as follows: "I exte nd to all of you fellow Parliamentarians throughout the Commonwealth, warm parliament ary greetings and congratu lations on the occasion of the 77th Birthda y of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

"This is a day to renew our faith in the noble ideals and objectiv es which att racted us to the CPA and for which the CPA has come to be known and respected throughout the free world. lt is also a day to rededicate all our energies to consolidating and extending belief in and practice of Parliamentary Democracy to new heights and frontiers. For Commonwealth countries with existing Parliaments the task is to raise the practice of Parliamentary Democracy to new and higher heights.

There is a tempta tion to take for granted and to assume that Parliamentary Democracy will sustain itself and not keep guard against creeping attem pts to fetter the practic e and growth of Parliamentary Democracy. "I want to take the occasion of the celebration of our 77th Birthda y to appeal to every Member and Branch of the CPA to make a special effort to contribute to the creation of favourable conditions for the ext ension of Parliamentary Democracy to new and wider boundaries. I am sure that we all want to see a bigger CPA membership next year when we celebrate our 78th Birthda y.

"In the meanwhile, the contin ued existence and toler ance of apartheid in South Africa, a former Commonwealth country, is and must be taken as a challenge to every CPA Member and Branch alike. A challenge because apartheid is a pain in our democratic flesh. lt constitut es a constraint to the further practice and growt h of the CPA, not only in the African Region of the CPA, but also in other CPA Regions as its continued existence lurks as a potential th reat to the life and health of Parliament ary Democracy and other democratic institutions. There can therefore be no compromise over apartheid.

We are all, as soldiers for Parliamentary Democracy, called upon to fight the good 77 fight with all our might until the flag of the CPA is once more raised high in South Africa, Namibia and indeed elsewhere in other Regions of the CPA where the CPA banner lies trodden on the ground. "I wish everyone of you, and indeed every Branch, st erling success in your Parliament ary careers and work. "The Honourable Lavu Mulimba, MP, Chairman." ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Chu rchill Health Centre Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, Manito bans are very proud indeed of Churchill's role as an important community in the Canadian North. lt has been said by many politicians tha t we are a country from sea to sea to sea, and it is indeed tha t third sea which is located here in our province. But we have an issue affect ing tha t very important and significant port, because we have been informed tha t the Northwest Territories is considering reducing its commitment, if not elimi nating its commitment enti rely, to the health centre at Churchill, which now presently serves in great numbers the citiz ens of the eastern Arct ic.

I ask the First Minister (Mr. Filmon): What measures does his Government plan to take to maintain the health centre as a viable facility in light of the fact tha t the message that this House, through his Government, is giving to the Territories is tha t they are not wanted as provinces in this Confederation? • (13 35) Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I begin by rejecting categ orically and totally the assertion tha t is made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs) that we are telling the Northw est Territories or the Yukon that we do not want them as part of Canada.

I met with the head of the Government in the Yukon just a month ago, and we had a very pleasant exchange. I told him at tha t time tha t I was very interested in continuing to work cooperatively with him and with his Government. With respect to the potential withdrawal of the use of the health care centre in Churchill from the Northwest Territories, my Minister responsible for Health (Mr. Orchard) will be in conta ct with him.

We will have the discussions, make them kno w our concerns, make them aware of the fact tha t we would like to work cooperatively with them, and have them continue to use tha t health care centre so tha t it can continue to remain viable for the people of Churchill and surrounding areas.

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 Churchill Development Board - funding Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, with a supplementary question to the First Minister (Mr. Filmon). We know tha t shipping and transportation is of grave import ance to the Port of Churchill, but the Saskatche wan Government and the Alberta Government has seen fit to not contribute their share to the funding of the Churchill Development Board, which is the agency which has spread the value of this port worldwide.

In what way is this Government going to make up for the shortf all in funding for this vitally important organization to continue its work of promoting and developing Manitoba's only seaport? Hon. Gary Filmon (P remier ): Mr. Sp eaker, my Government will continue to deal cooperatively with the Governments of Saskatchewan and Alberta. I might say tha t we have esta blished better relations, even in the first thr ee months, than our predecessor Government had in its six-and-a-half years with the Governments of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

We had an excellent meeting as First Ministers in British Columbia earlier this year in May. At tha t time, we issued a record of communique in which we had agreement on significant issues tha t were of importance to all the west ern provinces and, as a result of tha t kind of relationship, my Ministers will be having further discus sions with the Governments of Alberta and Saskatche wan to impress upon them the importance of the Port of Churchilll, not only to Manitobans, but indeed to all of western Canada.

As a result of tho se discussions, we will continue to demonstrate in the future the support tha t we have demonstrated in the past for the Port of Churchill. I might let the Leader know - and she was not around I suppose during th ose years when, under the Lyon administration, we convened a meet ing in Dauphin of all the people who were potentially interested in the Port of Churchill, a major meeting of agricultur e producers, of people who used transportation. This was in 19 79 or 19 80 when my colleague, the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) was then the Minister of Agriculture.

We demonst rated, by bringing together people who were interested in the Port of Churchill, who had a stake in the Port of Churchill, tha t we were going to do everything possible to expand the use of the Port of Churchill. We made a commitm ent to the Port of Churchill which we have not changed . Over all the se years we have been supporti ve of the Port of Churchill. We will continue to be supportive of the Port of Churchill and will do everything possible to keep it operating on a viable basis for the benefit of all Manitobans. * (13 40) 78 Port of Churchill - Funding Mrs.

Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposit ion): I should inform the Premier tha t I certainly was here during the Lyon days and th at is what made me become the Leader of the Liberal Party. I would like to ask the First Minister (Mr. Filmon), Mr. Speaker: What is his Government doing specifically with regard to obta ining additional funding for rail line development so that the Port of Churchill can become a meaningful port in this province? Discussions are fine, but discussions do not equal financing. Hon. Gary Filmon: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear tha t the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs.

Carstairs) was not satisfied with the work th at was being done by Mr. Axworthy and the other Liberals who were around, and took it upon herself to change all of th ose things. I am also interested to hear tha t she is now advocating tha t the Province of Manitoba should take the responsibility to build rail lines, to build the railroads in Manitoba. I find it absolutely absurd. Last week on Friday, we had her Agriculture critic (Mr. Evans) suggesting tha t all farmers who did not take out crop insurance should now be allowed retroactively to take out crop insurance after the y have had a crop failure. Mr.

Speaker, she is all over the map. She is giving suggestions tha t make absolutely no sense and, if she is advocating tha t we ought to build the railways in Manitoba, then I suggest to her tha t we do not have enough money for all the promises, all the commitments and all the suggestions tha t she has been making even in the first few days tha t this Legislature has been open. Mrs. Carstairs: So much for the commitment of this Government to the Port of Churchill. Kopstein Report release Mrs.

Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Pub lic Insurance Corporation (Mr. Cummings). We on this side of the House were heartened by the Throne Speech statem ent: "Open Government means keeping Manitobans fully informed and rendering public servants and politicians fully accountabl e." To this end, the Government stated tha t it would require M PlC rates to be approved by the Public Util ites Board. In this spirit of openness, will the Minister responsible tell this House when Jud ge Kopstei n's report will be ready? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister responsible for MPIC): Mr. Speaker, as has been previously reported to the media, the judge expects to have his report completed by about the 15 th of August. Mrs. Carstairs: A supplement ary qu estion to the same Minister, can this House look forward to it being tabl ed in this House on or about the 16 th of August? Mr. Cummings: The 14 th. Mr. Speaker, I will undertake to table the report as soon as I have had an opportunity

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 to examine it so tha t I may respond to the media and to the Members opposite in an intelligent manner. Mrs. Carstairs: Can we have a commitment from the Minister today as to how long he will require to have the report in his hands so he can read it before it will be shared with other Members of this House? Mr. Cummings: Perhaps it has something to do with how fast I read, but I already responded to that question. * (13 45) Child Care Task Force Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): The Government in their Speech from the Throne made a number of announcements on studies and task forces. I have in front of me the number of studies, just in the library of this Legislature, stud ying the issue of � child care in Canada, indeed in Manitoba, task force • after task force, Mr. Speaker. I would ask the Minister of Community Services (Mrs. Oleson): What does she hope to gain by yet another task force on child care in thi s province? Hon. Charlotte Oleson (Minis te r of Communi ty Services): I am aware tha t th ere have been many stu dies done.

This child care syst em in Manitoba has been in place for some time now. I think it behooves a new Government to take a look at how we have progressed, where we need to go, what subjects need to be addressed. For tha t reason, I have initia ted the task force. Mr. Doer: The former Leader of the Opposition and the Cons ervat ive Pa rty (Mr. Filmon) campaig ned contin uously on the basis tha t they had a plan and the y were able to take over the province. They did not tell the people of Manitoba tha t their plan was to have a task force on every difficult issue facing Canadians and Manitobans. Mr.

Speaker, to the same Minister, � what is the criteria of the task force, who are their , participants, when is it expected to answer, and could the Minister table tha t in the House today? Mrs. Oleson: No, I cannot table tha t in the House today . The task force and its manda te and its participants will be announced in due course. Two of the things that we want to look at is someth ing tha t has not been really addressed in this province, rural day care and Nativ e day care. Those are two of the very important things we will want to look at with tha t task force, as well as many other things. Mr.

Doer: Given the fact tha t this province is one of two in Canada with no plan and no position to submit to the federal Government, all politic al parties certainly support the expansion of child care in rural Manitoba to build on the best child care syst em in Canada. Let us stop stud ying it, let us stop task forcing it, let us start acting as a responsible Government on behalf of Manitobans on this very important issue. I would ask the Min ister when she will have her criteria, her 79 participants and the terms of reference ready for the people of Manitoba in this province. Mrs.

Oleson: The task force tha t is going to be undertaken has not impinged at all upon the initiativ es taken by the federal Government in planning day care for the futur e of this province. We have a plan, we have a policy tha t the legislation was tab led in the House of Commons yesterday. So my officials will be working immediately to put into operation in Manitoba tha t plan. The task force will not harm tha t or slow it down in any way. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Concordia, with a final supplementa ry. Mr. Doer: If the Minister has a plan, no one in Manitoba understands what it is.

We would ask, on behalf of Manitobans, to table the plan in this House, to table the strategy , to table the criteria, to table the te rms of reference, to table the participants so Manitoba will not be the last one out of the chute as it presently is with this Minister, tha t Manitoba will return to a leadership position in this province as we have in the past . Mrs. Oleson: I find it rather difficult to be patient with the Member. The legislation was table d in the House of Commons yeste rday. The plans are ready to be implemente d, but we had to have that legislation.

We have to know the parameters; we have to negotiate. Every single province in this country is in the same position. They are all negotia ting. No one has sig ned an agreement. * (1 350) City of Winnipeg Council - reductions Mr. John Angus (St. Norbert): My ques tion, Mr. Speaker, strikes right at the heart of this Government's elect ion promises to have open and honest government. lt is directed to the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Durcharme).

Would the Minister please tell this Assembly if, at the official delegation meeting on the 27th of Ju ne, he discussed with or advised the official delegation of his intentions to reduce the size of council and, if so, what was their reaction? Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Urban Affairs): I would be glad to put tha t on record, as I tried to put tha t on record yeste rday. At the official delegat ion, it was qu estione d whether there will be a reduction in council. We told them that it was in the process and the decision will be coming forward. Mr.

Angus : Did the Min ister advise the official delegation, as he did this Member in a briefing in the Minister's office on the 22nd of June 19 88, tha t only items tha t were necessary would be addressed in this Session and tha t the size of city council would not be pursued?

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 Mr. Duc harme : To the same Mem ber, what was discussed was - he is correct tha t the important items be brought forward to the Legislatu re. We felt, because of the Boundaries Commission tha t has to deal with th ese in the fall, tha t was what we considered an important item and would be brought forward. Mr. Angus: I apologize. I have 12 years of governments not talking to the City of Winnipeg so, if my frustrations are coming forward, it is because I feel very strongly about this point, and I apologize to you. Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr.

Ducharme), if he did discuss this with the official delegation and if he did tell them tha t it would not be on the agenda, would he ple ase apologize to my Leader for offending her int egrity in this House yesterday? Mr. Ducharme: First of all, I will not apologize for the simple reason tha t it was discussed on the agenda. I gave the answer on the previous qu estion and again I speak to him. Also his same Leader yeste rday, in her Throne speech, mentione d tha t I did not appear before the Chern iack Report. That was another case of her not divulging the correct fact.

I, as part of the board of commissioners at the time, did appear before the Cherniack Report. Dept. Amalgamation Mr. Harold Taylor (Wo lseley): My question is for the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) in the absence of the Minister of the Environment (Mr. Cannery). Mr. Spea ker: Order, please. We do not refer to Members either being present or absent. Mr. Taylor: To the First Minister (Mr. Filmon), the Government's action of the past week shows us tha t the Tories are right wing wolves in moderate fleeces.

This Government has stated its intention to esta blish a set of restrainable developments which will be a good move in the unlikely event tha t they get it right, but this same Government has folded the Environment Department into Labour, where it will hobble along as an orphan neglected and underfunded. Mr. Speaker, will the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) honour this Ho use with some rational iza tions for his Gove rnment's hypocrisy on the one hand of championing environmentally sound development and then wrecking the means to actually accomplish it? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr.

Speaker, given tha t it is his first opportunity in front of the cameras, I am sure tha t the Member would not mind repeating tha t question. There was a great deal of heckling going back and forth and I did not hear the lengthy

preamble, so I wonder if you would mind going over tha t once again. Mr. Taylor: lt would appear tha t there are audio problems over on the far side of the House as well as far-out solutions . Will the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) honour this House with some rationa lizations for his 80 Government's hypocrisy of championing on the one hand environmentally sound development and then wrecking the means for actuall y accomplishing it? Thank you. Mr. Filmon: Mr.

Speaker, among many things, th ere is an opportun ity for us in many departments in areas of government service to rationali ze and to make more efficient and more effect ive the senior management. What we are talking about involves the elimination of a limited number of people, does not involve the eliminat ion in any way of program money. Funds will st ill be spent on all the areas of responsibility of the Department of Environment, Workplace Safety and Health. What we have done is consolidated senior management, just as the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs.

Carstairs) advocated on behalf of the Liberal Party when the y were running for election just a few months ago. I am sure tha t the Member for Wolseley does not recall it, perhaps was not involved in many of tho se statements. The fact of the matter was the y said, eliminate bureaucracy, not services to people. That is precisely what we are doing. * (13 55) Mr. Taylor: A supplemental qu estion, Mr. Speaker. How will the new Environment Branch maintain a distinct identity and mand ate and avoid bei ng overshadowed by the department's labour focus? Mr.

Filmon: I do not accept that it will be overshadowed in any way. The fact of the matter is tha t it is a department tha t has several responsibilit ies. I can recall when I was Minister of Environment, it was at tha t time Consumer and Corporate Affairs and Environment. The Leader of the Opposit ion (Mrs. Carstairs) is being her usual negati ve self, but tha t is okay. The public understands tha t she has nothing positiv e to say about thi ngs.

She is even negative when she goes to Nova Scotia, her old home province, and insults the political leaders th ere. lt is part of her daily demeanor and we will accept tha t. The reality is tha t we are in no way downgrading the responsibilities of the Department of the Environment. The Environment will have very significant effect in our province.

We have suggested that, through the sustai nable development initia tiv es we are ta king, we have a better app roach to Environment, having it worked hand-in-hand with all development in Manitoba so tha t in future our development will be tha t type of development tha t is environmentally sound. We will eliminate much of the conflict tha t occurred in the past between industrial development and other types of development and the environment. They are going to work hand-in-glove, so tha t in future the development we have in this province will be of positiv e benefit to the people of Manito ba. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for Wolseley, with a final supplement ary. Mr. Ta ylor: Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker. A finai supplemental to the First Minister (Mr. Filmon). If this Government is so intent on consolidating departments, why was not Environment, for example,

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 com bined with Natu ral Resou rces to form a new Department of Environment and Natu ral Resources with potential, significant posit ive impact instead? Mr. Filmon: All of the se proposed possibilitie s are always there. Other Governments have att empt ed tha t in the past.

In fact, Environment used to be with Natural Resou rces. lt was seen to be separate and apart from Natu ral Resources in tha t it had effects on indust rial development, for instance. it had significant effects on the way in which we plan various areas of development, highways, municipal affairs and so on. 1t has a great deal to do with Workplace, Safety and Health which is interrelated with Labour. So all of the se thi ngs have an effect and we had to evaluate the se. 1t was our judgment, Mr.

Speaker, tha t the combination of Workplace, Safety and Health and Environment fit very nicely with Labour and that is why it was done. Port of Churchill - fut ure Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I have a question for the Minister of Hi ghways and Transportat ion (Mr. Driedger). Four years ago our former Government signed a $93 million agreement with the federal Government to upgrade and secure the future of the Port of Churchill. As part of that agreement the two levels of Government and C. N. commit ted thems elves to a target of 750,000 ton nes of grain per year to be shipped through tha t port.

Now in the fifth year of tha t agreement and in, I might add, the first year of a Tory Government in this province, we see the Port of Churchill th reatened with closure. My qu estion is to the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr Driedger). What action has this Minister taken to secure the Port of Churchill and ensure tha t the federal Government lives up to its commitment to the people of Manitoba tha t was undertaken in tha t agreement that was signed four years ago? * (14 00) Hon.

Albert Driedge r (M inister of Highways and Transportation): I want to thank the Member for Dauphin for raising the quest ion, he himself having been the Minister of th at department for many years. I do not think it ever reached the 750,000 tonne s that he indicated was commit ted. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I want to indicate - the Member asked what we have done or what I have done in terms of keeping grain moving through the Port of Churchill - tha t I was up at the Port of Churchill a little over two weeks ago. I met with the federal Minister of Transport, Benoit Bouchard.

I met with the federal Minister responsible for the Wheat Board, Charlie Mayer. I had a joint meeting with him last Wednesday just prior to the opening of this House to express my concerns about keeping grain flowing through the Port of Churchill. 81 Despite the rumours tha t have been circulating that there will be no grain flowing through the Port of Churchill this year because of the lack of crop conditions, I have the assurance from the federal Minister of Transport tha t the y will consider moving as much grain as possible through the Port of Churchill. Mr.

Plohman: Empty promises are not enough and the y should not be enough for this Minister. 1t is nearly the end of Ju ly. The first ship should have arrived by now. lt takes three weeks from the time that action is init iated for the grain to get to Churchill. That means tha t we are into the middle of August already. I ask the Minister specifically: what assurances did he get from the federal Minister as to when tha t grain will be loaded? When it will arrive in Churchill, when the port will open, and how much grain will be shipped through tha t port this year? Mr. Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, I find it int eresting th at the Member for Dauphin gets so roused when he raises his question. He full well knows the difficulties with in the system of get ting grain moving through the Port of Churchill. When he indicated before tha t he signed an agreement for 750,000 ton nes a year to be moved through the Port of Churchill, he never accomplished tha t at one stage of the game. The Port of Churchill has tremendous pote ntial. We have never reached tha t potential or anywhere close to it. We will be working hard, as my Leader indicated.

We will be working hard to enhance the product ion and shipping through the Port of Churchill for all the people of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Dauphin, with a final supplement ary. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, Manit obans are tired of begging for act ion on the Port of Churchill. We have a Conservative Government in this province. The Minister has just admitted tha t he is powerless, tha t he has received no assurances from the federal Minister for shipments through the Port of Churchill or tha t he does not care about shipments th rough the port.

I am asking this Minister what act ion does he intend to take to assure Manitobans and this House tha t the federal Government will live up to its commitments under that agreement and ensure tha t sufficient shipments are put through th at port in this shipment year. What action will he take? Mr.

Driedger: Once again, I find it amazing how the Member for Dauphin, who was responsible for many years for the Port of Churchill, never indicated to this House that Saskatch ewan wit hdrew their funding for the Port of Churchill Development Board two years ago, that Alberta wit hdrew it one year ago, and today he is raising concerns about the Port of Churchill and asking what we will do in terms of a commitm ent. Mr. Speaker, I will indicate to you our commitment is to take and keep the Port of Churchill viable and we will do every effort as I have indicated.

I have already tal ked with both the federal Ministers involved, and we will continue to have tha t kind of discussion.

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) on a point of order. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, this Minister is not giving the facts to this House. I clearly told this House and raised the issue of the Conservative Government's lack of commitment in Saskatc hewan and Alberta for the Port of Church ill when they pul led out of the Development Board's sponsorship. That is a clear fact , it is in Hansard. This Minister is backed into a corner and now he is using untruthful state ments in this House. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader Mr.

McCrae) on the same point of order. Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I think the Honourable Memb er for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) has been around this place long enough to know the use to be made of a point of order, and I think he also knows that what he is doing is debating a matter in Question Period under the guise of a point of order. I suspect tha t you are about to inform the Honourable Member of tha t yourself, but I put forward that position. Mr. Speaker: A dispute over the facts is not a point of order. The Honourable Member for Churchill on the same point of order. Mr.

Jay Cowan (Churchill): No, Mr. Speaker, on a question. Highway 75 - twinning Mrs. Gerrie Hammond (Kirkfield Park): My question is to the Minister of Highways (Mr. Driedger), and I wonder if the Minister of Highways could give the House and the people of Manitoba an update on the long awaited Highway 75. Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate tha t ques tion. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. An Honourable Member: Wait until you hear the supplement ary. Mr. Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, the Members opposite might make light of the question but I think Manitobans have a major concern about what has happened in the highways program over the last eight years. I think the people of Winnipeg are very interested in terms of what is happening to Highway 75. I would like to indicate that my Leader, the Premier (Mr. Filmon), we had indicated tha t the twi nning of Highway 75 would be a priority with our Government, and I am very pleased to indicate tha t we will be having an escalated program coming forward on Highway 75 for the tw inning of it.

I would like to also indicate at this time that, up to the point where we have construction now, there were 82 no further plans as to the tw inning of Highway 75. There was not even a survey or design or functional program or nothing done. We have taken the initia tive. We will be working forward on the twi nning of Highway 75 from both ends. land Titles Office - Delay Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my qu est ion is for the Honourable Attorne y-General (Mr. McCrae) of this province. Yesterday, I was truly intrigued tha t the Honourable Attorne y-General (Mr.

McCrae) responded to my quest ion about psychiatric care in this province by citing his dealing with the Winnipeg Land Tit les Office delay problem as an indicat ion of how he is going to handle his department. I want to inform the Honourable Attorney -General (Mr. McCrae) and this House tha t in fact today the Winnipeg Land Titles Office delay stands at 43 days. lt has increased sinc e June 17, 19 88, when the Honourable Attorne y-General promised the people of this city immediate rectification of the problem. This is intolerable, this is unjust. The people of this city are losing thousands of dollars every day.

They want some action now. Mr. Speaker, my question is: How much money has the Honourable Attorne y-General (Mr. McCrae) spent in the last five weeks making the situation worse for the people of this city? Is this the type of swift justice and swift rectificat ion of delays in the justice syst em tha t the people of this province can expect from this government as the y promised in their Speech from the Throne? Hon. James McCrae (Attorney-General): Mr. Speaker, I must say I appreciate the theatrics of the honourable gentleman toda y and the forceful nature of his question.

I suggest tha t he is bringing to this Hous e information which may not reflect or probably does not reflect the situation at the Land Titles Office. He may have found one applicat ion there tha t has fallen by the wayside or fallen through the cracks, as opposed to what is actually the fact . The fact is tha t the government of this province moved very quickly indeed regarding delays at the Land Titles Office which we agree are absolutely unacceptable. We moved very qu ickly to provide eight positions to the Winnipeg Land Title s Office to work on the backlog. That had amounte d to $90,000.00.

Let us remember the nature of !he problem. The Honourable Member and I have had discussions about tha t as well as other members of his caucus. I took the trouble to attend a meeting held by angry residents who are faced with increased costs as a result of delays at the Land Titles Office. Let us remember also how the se things get starte d and when the y got started and how the problems got started . We moved quickly to address tha t problem. I can assure the Honourable Member I will look immediately into the situation tha t he raises tod ay.

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 Mr. Ec:lwards: Mr. Speaker, again for the Honourable Attorne y-General (Mr. McCrae), and I certainly have no qualms tha t he knows the problem. That is clear. I would remind the Honourable Attorne y-General tha t in fact the delay, the signing date for titles is posted daily in the Land Titles Office and, as of to day, it reflects 43 days of delay. I want to ask, by way of supplement ary question, again my first question and I would like it answered. How much has the Honourable-Attorney General spent in five weeks to make this situation worse? I would like an answer to tha t qu estion.

And I would further like to know if in fact this same response will be brought in next year and the year after and the year after that. How long do Winnipeggers have to put up with this? Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, I suppose I could respond with a point of order de aling with the fact tha t Honourable Members of the Opposit ion side cannot force members to answer quest ions, which I did answer. If he checks Hansard, he will see tha t the re is an answer th ere. The other rule tha t the Honourable Member should remember is tha t qu estions should not be repetit ive. Mr. Edwards: Mr.

Speaker, again for the Honourable Attorne y-General. Would the Ho nourable Attorne y General please confirm or in fact tell this House what he is doing about the decision of the prior administration to implement the computer system in the Winnipeg Land Titles Office over five years? Is he reviewing it? Is tha t five-year plan acceptable to him? What is he going to do about that? Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, I have been assured by the Winnipeg Land Titles Office that the compute rized automa ted system is - work is being done on tha t.

The fact is tha t the long-term solution to potential problems at the Land Titles Office unfortu nately presents a short-term problem, tha t short-term problem being tha t staff are being used to put the automa ted system in place and to get all the paper documents converted to the computer. That takes time and it also takes staff. Knowing tha t is the reason tha t we put more staff to the ta sk, not only of dealing with the ongoing business but also to get the job of get ting automa ted done. When tha t is up and running, the situation will be much improved from what it is today.

I am not going to stand here and tell the Honourable Member tha t the situa tion today is sat isfact ory. lt is not sati sfacto ry. We could have sat on this for another couple of years, as the previous Government might ha ve done, given the tact the way tha t it handles the economy there is never any mone y available, then ther e is no flexibilit y. My colleagues in the Cabinet responded quickly to my demands and my requests for assistance to address the problems at the Land Title s.

I have told the Hono urable Member that I will make inquiries immediately at Land Titles to find out just what the problem is today. * (14 10) 83 Churchill Health Centre Mr. Jay Cowan (Churchill}: My que stion is to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and I have to indicate to the Minister of Health tha t I happen to agree with a couple of comments he made or is qu oted as making in the newspaper, although I find myself in serious disagreement and qu ite concerned about one of the other comments.

Firstly, I agree with him tha t the Churchill Health Centre is a world-class facility, and thank him for taking note of the work tha t has gone on by many Governments to make tha t a reality . Secondly, I agree with the Minister that it makes sense that the Northwest Territories continue to util ize the Churchill Health Centre.

But where I disagree very strongly with the Minister of Health is tha t he is quoted as saying that, if the Northw est Territories does not utili ze the centr e to the extent necessary, the Conservative Government would have no option but to consider closing the Churchill Health Centre, and tha t is a serious matter . I hope tha t it is a misquote or a misinterpretation of his comments. My question to the Minister is: Can he indicate what action he is taking now, not what act ion he is going to be ta king as was referenced by the First Minister (Mr.

Filmon), but what action is he taking now to resolve the outstandi ng concerns between the Northw est Territories and the Churchill Health Centre and the Province of Manitoba? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): I thank the Honourable Member for Churchill (Mr. Cowan) for recognizing some future potential difficulti es tha t may happen if the Northw est Territories undertakes some future proposals to locate potential services of health care elsewhere in the Northwest Territories. The Member for Churchill ought to carefully read his research document, the

article in the Free Press, wherein it said no such thing where I am directly qu oted as saying we would have no option but to close the Churchill Health Centre. That was not indicated by myself. I think, if he follows to the top paragraph in the second column of the article, he will find my comments accurately quoted in which with drawal of services, if tha t were to happen, would seriously impact on the level of service at the Churchill Health Centre. Now to answer the Member's questions, Mr. Speaker, I have contacted and been in a phone conversation with the administrator of the Churchill Hospital .

She is meeting with my director of Rural Health Care Facilities, I believe, today. The staff at the Manitoba Health Services Comm ission are pursuing with their counterparts in the Northwest Territories exact ly what the territorial plans are in terms of provision of health care services in the Territories, whether in fact they have any plans afoot to util ize the hospital at Yellowknife for patients emanating from the east ern part of the Northwest Territories or whether the y would continue to use Churchill.

Every indication we have to date is tha t the y will continue to use the Churchill Health Centre, the Churchill Hospital , and the services tha t we provide in conjunction with the Faculty of Medicine for northern

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 Manitoba out of Churchill. Noth ing is changing in Churchill. lt will be our undertaking to negotia te and discuss with the Territories to assure tha t we are able to offer and continue to offer to tho se citi zens the very fine medical services tha t are available out of Churchill without the necessity of dupl icating the services elsewhere in the Territories. Mr. Cowan: lt is gratif ying to learn tha t the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) has been misquoted, but I would ask him specifically if he is -(Interjection) -now he says he is not misquo ted , and the paper very clearly - (Interject ion)-We have heard this Minister of Health so many times try to get out of what he has said by saying tha t he did not really say tha t in the first instance and he was misquoted, he was misinterpreted. That is one of the reasons why I ask my ques tion, to give him an opportun ity to clarify the impression tha t was left in the paper tha t Government would consider closing the Churchill Health Centre.

I would ask the Minister, further to his comments: Has he met personally, because this is a matter tha t should demand his personal atte ntion, with representatives of the Northwest Territories?

If he has not, will he undertake in this House toda y to arrange a meeting at the earliest convenience with political elected officials from the Nort hwest Territories to ensure tha t we know full well what their concerns are and are able to work with them at the highest level in a consult ive and cooperative manner to ensure that the Churchill Health Centre, a world-class facilit y, contin ues to be able to operate in the fine tradition tha t it has over the past decade and then some? So will he undertake tha t act ion now and not suggest tha t it can be done in the future?

The time for this Government to act is right now, at present, and it is incumbent upon him to take strong act ion to protect the Churchill Health Cent re. Mr. Orchard: I might indicate to my honourable friend from Churchill - not tha t I want to be a teacher and lecture him - but quota tions have tho se two little marks on the end of them and those are what people say. Without th ose marks, the y are a paraphrasing of good remarks. A qu otat ion is one thing; a report, a paraphrasing is something else.

I simply want to point out to my honourable friend from Churchill tha t this circumstance of devolution of health care services to the Northwest Territories was accomplished some time ago. I am not aware of any meetings that the previous administration had to avoid the pot ential circumstance, the hypothetical situation. As I have indicated to my honourable friend from Churchill, I have had discussion with the administrator of the Churchill Health Centre.

She is meeting today with the director of Rural Health Faciliti es of the Manitoba Health Services Commission, and Health Services Commission staff are undertaking discussions with their counterparts in the Northw est Territories to deter mine what the agenda is of the No rthwest Territories in terms of provision of health care services to their people in the eastern side of the Territories. Mr.

Speaker, the services are acknowledged to be excellent there by the users in the Northwest Territories. lt is our considered posit ion, and the position we will 84 take to discu ssions with the Northwest Territories Department of Health and officials and the Minister, tha t th ose services can be provided in the long term to the quality provision of good health care to those residents. That is the situation we support. That is the situa tion that has been supported in the past , and we have no indication that will change. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. Some Honourable Members: Leave! Mr.

Speaker: Is there leave? Has leave been granted? (Agreed) The Honourable Member for Churchill, with a final supplementary question. Mr. Cowan: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate all tha t the Minister has said his staff is going to do. One knows tha t one has to rely on staff but also the Minister should know, because he did lecture long enough when he was in Opposition, tha t certain issues take a polit ical resolution. Is the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) prepared immediately to undertake to meet with elected officials and thos e officials responsible for health in the Northwest Territories to ensure tha t there are open lines of communicat ion at the highest level possible to resolve any outstandi ng differences tha t may, in what he says in a hypothetical sense, result in, and I am using a quo te from him, " ... serious effects on the Churchill House Centre in the future. " In an attempt to avoid tho se serious effects, is he committed now, will he commit, will he undertake to meet with elected officials from the Northwest Territories immediately? Mr.

Orchard: Mr. Speaker, let me lay a basic bit of groundwork for my honourable friend, the Member for Churchill. To date the devolution of health care services has been granted to the Northwest Territories. That is an event tha t hap pened whilst the pr.evious administration was in office.

Therefore, the hypothetical threat to Churchill as a northern health care facility existed during my previous colleague's time in office and, qu ite frankly, I think the Member for Churchill represents tha t area. * (14 20) Now we are told tha t a number of initia tiv es are under way, first of all, an atte mpt to enhance the membership on the Churchill Centre Board with membership from the Northwest Territories, from Rankin Inlet and other communiti es. Secondly, I repeat for my honourable friend tha t discussions are going on at this moment regarding the future of the Churchill Health Centr e. Mr.

Speaker, the issue is not the loss of services to Churchill today because the Northwest Territories has formulated no plan to remove services from Churchill. Senior executive members of the Manitoba Health Services Commission are discussing with their counterparts in the Northwest Territories to find out what policy direction the Territories Government is wishing to take now tha t the y have more

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 full and complete control over delivery of health care services. Mr. Speaker, we can offer to the citizens of the Northwest Territories the fine facilitie s of Churchill. We intend to do tha t and we are doing that right now. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. May I remind the Honourable Minister of Beauchesne, Citation 358(2): "Answers to qu estions should be as brief as possible ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE Mr. Speaker: Order, please. On the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik), standi ng in the name of the Honourable Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer).

Mr. Gary Doer (leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Sp eaker, it is indeed an honour to have the opportu nit y to reply and respond to the Speech from the Throne presented here last Thu rsday at this First Session of the 34th Legislature of Manitoba. 1 would offer my best wishes to you, Mr.

Speaker, and congratula te you on your election to this high office as our Speaker, and I wish you well in a very important role and a very int eresting role with the situation of a minority Government and with the th ree-Party system basically in this province now tha t will present unique challenges to all of us, I am sure, and unique challenges to you as our Speaker. 1 would also like to congratula te the Deputy Speaker on his election to tha t position in this House.

I would wish, as is traditional, all Members the best personal health and happiness in this House although, as we all recognize in polit ics, to be quite hone st, we all start every election at 000, and we will all act accordingly in terms of representing our constituencies and our vision of moving to the Province of Mani toba - {interject ion)- Mr. Speaker, I knew the Member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) would take the first cheap shot from his seat. 1 am not disappointe d in tha t.

We took great joy in pointing out winning four of the last six elections and 1 am not surprised that he has taken his first chance, in my first opening paragraph, with his comments. That is why we respect democracy so much. 1 rise in my place to thank the constituents of Concordia for returning me to this House. lt is an honour tha t 1 will never take for granted, as all of us I know do in our own constituen cies, and I rise in my place today with a great deal of pride in our province.

The beauty of our province is always manifested in all of our beautiful four seasons but somet imes perhaps a little bit better in the beautiful time of the year that we are enjoying, with the tra gedy of course of the drought th at is affecting some of our fellow cit izens in a very, very serious way. 1 am also reminded at this time of the strength of Manitoba people.

I think the greatest commodity we 85 have, when we look at sector by sect or and industry by industry and area by area, is the strength of Manito bans, the diversity of Manitob ans, the strength of the people , the cooperative environment that Manitobans work in and have enjoyed over the la st number of years, the leadership position the y have taken, the combining of social, health and economic opportunities and challenges in a very, very balanced way.

That is the tradition tha t has built this province. lt has not all the advantages of other provinces in terms of its raw advantages. it has not all the advanta ges bestowed upon central Canada by years of historical advantage from our federal Governments, but we have the strength of people and the strength of the province which binds us together, notwithstan ding our partisan politics in our province. In dealing with the Speech from the Throne, I would like to make some general comments and then move through the speech very specifically.

I was listening to the speech very carefully last Thursday and was very interested in the content of the Speech from the Throne.

Quite frankly, it is somewhat trad itional to make comments on Speeches from the Throne in our usual 10 -second clips, and sometime s th ose are often fairly predictable. 1 was very disappoint ed tha t a Government tha t had told the people of Manitoba tha t the y had a plan, the y knew where they were going, they were going to face the challen ges of the province in a bold and confrontativ e way, came in with a lot of rhetoric, a lot of task forces, a lot of studies, a lot of round table s, a lot of tripartite groups, a lot of th is, a lot of that.

I thought we would see some new themes emerging, or some evidence of a substantive new direction for Manitoba. We could comment on that. But what we have seen in this Speech from the Throne is a patchwork of specific initia tiv es with no coherent plan or purpose. We have seen a willingness to engage in stud y after stud y aft er stud y. We have got some ti red Tory rhetoric, which I suggest looks very similar to the original Mulroney Speech from the Throne, which I was very disappointed in seeing. That was back in 19 84- 19 85.

I suspect some of the same authors were involved in writing the Speech from the Throne, its first draft, who were involved in the Mulroney Speech from the Throne. You can certainly see the kind of Darwinian language tha t is interspersed in terms of the real issues of Manitoba. Where boldne ss is needed, we find tim idness. Wh ere sensitiv ity is needed, we find callousness. Where caution is needed, we find reckless blundering.

Wha t is very clear from the outline of the Government's intentions is th is: This Government does not yet understand what sort of mandate it received on April 26 from the people, which is now manifest ing itself in this House th ree months later. They are seized with indecision. They are seized with dealing with just very simple targets and leaving the tough issues facing Manitob ans, as I say, to stud y groups, to tripartite bodies, to task forces, to consultations and all tho se buzz words and umbrellas for inaction, no plan, and no plan to implement on behalf of the people of Manitoba.

Certainly one would find tha t with this Speech from the Throne. If you were to ask the people in the coffee

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 shops of Manitoba the day aft er the Speech was presented in this House, there would be very little substance for the people of Manitoba in dealing with the challenges they face and dealing with the real issues tha t face Manito bans and their families and real issues in the coffee shops in terms of dealing with moving with this province into the future. They would remember maybe the 15 -gun salute, they would remember a little pomp and circumstance, and this Speech from the Throne will be remembered generally for a task force Speech from the Throne, rather than action.

We have sta tements of concern in the Speech from the Throne. For example, about economic growth and jobs, but yet this Government proposes to abolish the Jobs Fu nd. lt proposes to combine the departments tha t deal with small business in with big business, and we have plans tha t are being announced to diminish the role and importance of cooperativ es in our province.

We have fine statements and fine words and fine concerns about the quality of child care in this province, this from a Government that proposes to pump public dollars into a private day care system, a kind of proposal tha t even the top Tory Senator, if I could use that term, the top Tory Senator for Manitoba, Mr. Spivak, has said would be out rageous in terms of its priority for people of Manitoba. Maybe we could have at least a red Tory proposal, rather than the blue Tory proposals that are coming from Members opposite.

We hear concern about the future of rural and northern areas of this province, and then we see a situation where Communit y Places programs in northern Manitoba have been sla shed at a totally disproportionate rate of th ose of southern Manitoba. Yet, this is a Government tha t has not gone to bat for the aboriginal trappers. Again, fine words do not mean anything to th ose people in terms of specific action on their behalf. We hear soothing words on cooperation with labour, yet this is a Government again which cont radicts itself again toda y in the paper.

Maybe tha t is why - I cannot comment if the person is away or not, so I will not - but tha t we have a serious problem with the Minister of Labour (Mr. Connery) and the Premier, the First Minister (Mr. Filmon), contradicting each other on what the y are looking at, what th ey are going to do. 1 guess the same Minister pre-empted the Premier with the announcement to roll Environment into the Department of Labour. That same Minister said th at Environment just runs itself.

We will see whether the Minister feels, after a short period of Question Periods over a period of time of Environment, the department runs itself and whet her greater leadership is not required on this very, very important issue for Manitobans, our environment, our greatest heritage we pass on to our children. * (14 30) We hear soot hing words about a balanc ed management-labour relations environment.

Manitoba has the most balanced environment in Canada and yet, with any innovation, the Tories want to repeal, repeal, repeal, and we look forward to tha t debate and the 86 presentat ion by citizens on tha t issue with the Tories in this Government.

So we are, quite frankly, disappoint ed with the task forces th at are presented to us in de aling with su bstantiv e issues in this province, and we are concerned about the Mulroneyisms tha t appear in the Speech from the Throne, which I feel may have been helpful, certainly not to us in the August elect ion for tha t individual, but I do not think tha t the Mulroneyisms fit with the tradition and the heritage of this cooperativ e province tha t we now enjoy in Manitoba. 1 would like to say - and certainly the Minister from his seat again takes another little cheap shot - when we meet with Mr.

Broadbent, we do so publicly and we are proud to meet with him, unl ike the Members opposite who have Lowell Murray, Doctor No (No rman Spectre) hide in the hallways and sneak through the hallways of this House to meet with the Tory Caucus, and thank God for the vigilance of the press to catch them in th ose secret meet ings dealing with Meech Lake. 1 would like to say tha t there are some posit ive thin gs in the Speech from the Throne, and I would like to say tha t at the outset.

I applaud the initia ti ve to bring in conflict-of-inte rest legislation for former Ministers of Government, for former senior civil servants. Certainly Manitoba has been cited as the most posit ive example of conflict-of-interest guidelines for exist ing Ministers of Government, and it was cited in the McDonald Commission, or the Parker Commission quite regularly in dealing with the handlings and the goings-on of Sinclair Stevens in terms of his handlings of his portfolio and his wheeling and dealing with his personal finances.

The Parker Commission I think adequately addressed the inadeq uacies of the federal conflict-of-interest legislation and the inadequacies of the performance of a Minister, which I would suggest is required reading for all Members of this House, the Parker Commission, and required reading for Members in the Cabinet and Front Benches of the Government. We think the guidelines are deficient in the area of former Cabinet Ministers. lt is certainly an issue we began to discuss internally ourselves when we were formerly in Government, and we will try to play a positiv e

part in tha t area. I can remember the situation th at developed in the House of Commons previously with the Gillespie Affair and Marc Lalonde saying it was not a breach of the conflict-of-interest guidelines with the heavy oil project in Nova Scotia, and the stoic Prime Minister at the time saying: "Because it is not a breach, there is no problem." That may have made great Jesuit ical logic, but we know tha t was inadeq uate for the sta ndards and ethics of the people of Canada, and we intend on playing a p osit ive

part in developing thos e guidelines for former Ministers. We would hope tha t the guidelines and legislation is developed consistent with allowing people to have a livelihood after th ey are out of their jobs so the y can use their skills but not use their insider information. That would be inappropriate as former Ministers and former senior civil servants. We applaud the Government for going the last lap on the Freedom of Information Act. lt is a lot of work.

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 There have been some polit ical shots across the bow over the last period of time. I respect tha t as part of the politi cal process. Documenting and catal oguing 10 0 years of documents is a very lengthy process. lt took us three years. We had about 95 percent of it ready at the change in Government and we are pleased with the Government departments tha t th ey are proceeding. 1 know, having worked in some of my own departments, that it does require constant pressure because you do not want to hire new staff.

You do not want to take pub lic health nurses from Community Services and put them into record catalog uing. You do not want to take an agricultural rep who is working with the drought situation and have him catalogue records. 1 think the application of this Act should be from within as well. We should not get overly zealous to create hundreds of new bureaucrats to continually catalogue, and we will be positive in tha t regard in dealing with the Freedom of Information.

As I say, we would not have completed 95 percent of the work in our own departments if we were not committed to its implementa tion. 1 would say tha t with the catal oguing of 10 0 years of documents will come some interest ing changes in the public service.

This is fundamentally an American innovation of freedom of information. lt is somewhat contrary, we should be aware, to the traditions of the British parliament ary system with minis terial responsibility where conflicting opinions that are in the public service are not com municated in a confrontati ve way to the public but rather the Minister in Cabinet is responsible for decisions and is responsi ble and accountable for th ose decisions in this House or indeed in any parliamentary syste m. So it is somewhat different and we should recognize tha t it is an American innovation to the Canadian syste m.

We should recognize tha t it also will pote ntially change the behaviour by which people document their opinions in the public service. We do not want to get into the situation which eventually developed in the Unit ed Sta tes where the only place you could get information is the presidential tape recording machines because nobody would write anything down in an American system with freedom of information. I think we have to maintain the British parliamentary st andards of accountabil ity with Cabinet Ministers and at the same time allow the public true access to documents and research material.

Even sometime s when they have conflict ing options for Ministers, we should not be afraid of presenting tha t to the public, and I think we should take a non-partisan position on tha t rather than cheap politic al shots. 1 also think it is positive tha t River House is going to receive enhanced funding. I can say with all degree of honesty tha t I personally had problems in the former Government where some of the decisions were made by a Crown corporation that made tha t decision on behalf of the governorship and accountabil ity of tha t Crown corporation.

I can think of th ree decisions tha t were made by tha t Crown corporation tha t required some kind of Cabinet override and overrule which I think is inappropriate. There was a problem with the Main Street project in its lack of resources in funding for some very vital 87 programs. We had to again override tha t agency when it was trying to cut back. There were some problems in terms of regional resources being cut back in Dauphin and Brandon and at the same time the resources were rather questionable - I would say this with all the advice to Honourable Members opposite - in the bureaucracy of tha t organization.

We had to fight struggle after struggle with programs such as Nati ve alcohol programs tha t were being cut when other programs should have been more pot entially on the priority list. * (1 440) So I would say tha t I would have overtu rned th at decision as well and I think the agency has to be more sensitiv e to its full mandate - it has got a lot of challenges - but I applaud the Speech from the Throne in tha t change and say tha t we had some difficulty ou rselves, and tha t is someti mes when you need "polit ical int erference in Crown corporations." lt is absolutely naive to say tha t Ministers accountable in this House cannot be responsible for decisions made.

You would like the agencies to make th ose decisions or the Crowns to make th ose decisions but, from time to time, ministerial accountabil ity requires changes on behalf of the public as opposed to arm's length decisions tha t were contrary to the public inte rest. I am also pleased with the Osborne Hous e recommendation. We were proceeding with a structural review. Services to women and families tha t were in violent situations require vigilance on behalf of all Parties in this House. We ,had put in 50 percent increases to tha t Budget, in th is last year, tha t was defeated by the Liberals and Conservatives.

We will be wat ching very carefully because there is a lot of work and there is no question - we had a long way to go. We were not providing the services across this province tha t are needed. We were not providing the funding tha t is going to be required to meet tha t demand. I want to say th at honestly in this House. We will work again cooperatively with all Parties on this very vital issue of people who are at risk in their homes with their families and have no shelters or resources for them.

We also have another posit ive note on the comment of the Government tha t admitted tha t Manitobans had shared in the prosperity of the 19 80s. I think it is very appropriate the Government mentions the fact th at Manitoba did indeed have prosperity over the 19 80s. They know and the Government knows now tha t we were on the leading edge right throughout the 19 80s in terms of the major economic indicators in this count ry. Even though we do not have all the advanta ges, we had the lowest or the second-lowest unemployment rate right throughout the Eighties.

We had the lowest unemployment rate, when we .left office, for youth anywhere in this country. lt was sti ll too high, no question about it. We had the most money spent per capita on health care. We had the most money spent per capita on child care. We had some of the best teacher-pupil ratios anywhere in the count ry. Our roads were right there in the middle because other services such as health care and other programs were very, very important to us with the recession th at took place.

TUesday , July 26, 19 88 We had the finest environmental laws in the count ry. We had just proclaimed tha t Act. There is considerable work ahead of us in terms of this province dealing with our environment and we intend to do tha t as a Party in this province. We had the most balanced labour-management laws in the country. We had the best days lost per strike of any province in the mainland of Canada.

Of course, we had the best situation in terms of tha t situation in this country and we would ask the Members opposite to be very careful when the y try to proceed with their repeal mentality as indicated in the Speech from the Throne. Those are some of the areas that I think we would say were positiv e and we will work in a cooperative way with the Members opposite on th ose areas of the Speech. I would also like to go through some of the other specific areas of the Speech from the Throne which I think are totally devoid of any action, any plan or any specific on behalf of Manitobans.

I would like to go t hrough the Sp eech page by page, as we somet imes do in Bills, in terms of the presentati on. The Government talked about the spirit of openness and accountabilit y. There is not a political Party or a politician who does not talk about being open, about being accountable, abOut being nice, about consulting, about doing what is in t he best interests of the people. There is not a politician in the world who does not say it and most people mean it.

I would like to say though that, if the last three days are any tangible indication of the real sincere efforts of this Government to be open and accountable, I would say with the greatest of respect tha t we have certainly got off on many, many wrong foots, feet or whatever else you want to use.-(Interject ion)-Oh, I am glad the Minister of Labour (Mr. Connery) has retu rned. Let me go through just a few things from the last th ree days. The Government will not table their legal opinion on free trade. The Government will not table th eir report on free trade and its effect on hydro.

The Government will not table the hydro pricing report they say the y have. The Government will not report the analysis the y have on water. The Government will not report and table the criteria th ey have for this task force th ey have set up as an umbrella for the Minister of Community Services (Mrs. Oleson) to deflect any accountabil ity in this House. The Government will not table an implementation plan to achieve the promises tha t th ey made on improving the criminal justice syste m, particularly for violent criminals and drunk drivers in thi s province. They will not table it. Mr.

Speaker, it is very sad that, in the first th ree days of their accountabil ity and openness, the y are already pract ising the first-envelope the ory of Government. Blame the former Government even for promises th ey make. You can get away with tha t for a period of time, but Manitobans do not believe the first-envelope the ory. Manit obans believe tha t the y elected a Government on April 26, albeit with a minority, to stand up in this House, not point fingers and say this is what I am doing or thi s is what I am not doing.

We have a terrible start , an atrocious start to the open, accountable Government on every specific issue. 88 Then we go into Crown corporations in the Speech from the Throne. I can assure the Members in this House tha t the Mem bers in Government are talking about repealing a couple of major areas, I believe, of accountabi lity in The Crown Accountabil ity Act tha t we passed last year, The Crown Accountabil ity Act that was voted against by the Conservatives and the Member for River Heights.

We bel ieve strongly tha t all the major Crown corporations of this province should have pub lic accountabil ity sessions, where the senior officers of the Crown corporation and the senior members of the board of directors appear before the public across the regions of Manitoba. I can assure the Speaker, when I was Minister of the Telephone System, we had meet ings set up, scheduled for Sept emb er in 12 different locat ions to deal with the concerns of Manitoba ns because, for many of tho se Crown corporations, they are monopolies.

They are monopolies tha t do not allow cit izens to walk across the st reet or allow cit izens to go to a shareholders' meeting to deal with the very legitima te concerns th ey have in a monopoly Crown corporation. The other innovation tha t we believe was important in The Crown Accountabil ity Act, Mr.

Speaker, was the fact tha t five or six Crown corporations in this province, major Crown corporations, in fact the Crown corporation with the largest revenue in the province and indeed the Crown corporation th at has the most profit of private or public-sector Crowns anywhere in this province, does not appear before the Manitoba Legislature in committee. lt is absolutely atrocious to us tha t the Liquor Commission, the Venture Tours, Data Services and others, do not appear before this Session of the Legislature. We believe that should take place. Mr.

Spivak and his task force - I did not agree with many of the Culver Riley recommendations, but the one area tha t I sincerely believe was appropriate, tha t all major Crowns should appear before this Legislature. I think it is the mandate of the new Government to decide how th ey are going to arrange the financial affairs of their Crown corporation s. But I do believe tha t the right of the public is to have major accountabil ity sessions across this province. I do believe tha t it is the right of this Legislature to examine the major Crowns.

I am not sure which positio ns the other polit ical parties will take because the y voted against this bill last year.

But I pledge tha t we will do everything in our power as a polit ical party to stop the disenfranchisement of the pub lic, the public hearings in th ose Crown corporations, and to stop the prohibition or the requirement of the major Crown corporations tha t used to be exempt from legislative scrutiny from being again exempted as th ey were prior to this legislation passing last year. * (1 450) I applaud the Government in proceeding to the Public Utili ties Board with the other Crowns that remain outside of the Public Utilit ies Board.

I always was very comfortable, as a neophyte and short-lived Minister of the Telephone System, on the PUB process. I thought it was an excellent avenue to have debates take place

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 between tho se who believe tha t city rates should not go up and tho se who believe tha t rural services should be improved and th ose who believe tha t other services should take place and the whole issue of people who are on welfare. Should the y be covered by the Telephone Syst em? Should the y be covered by the welfare rates? Should th ey be covered by somewhere else?

I think that it is a good consumer method to deal with the legitima te concerns of the public. it does not by any way mean that there will not be major policy issues still ahead of this Legislature and the Ministers in dealing with th ose Crown corporations, and I will give a couple of examples. The whole policy of deregulation in the telephone industry is a major politic al policy decision. The whole area of the deregulated environment and the proposed federal-provincial regulations in tha t area are major public policy issues. The whole area of developing rural t elephone services is a politic al issue, Mr.

Speaker. lt is a policy issue and tha t is why the former Minister and I went out with public hearings, because when we had this arm's length relationsh ip, the Telephone System board blamed the Government, the Government blamed the board and everybody blamed the PUB, and the people of Manitoba never got adequate rural telephone services.

So it is a public policy decision th at should be made by the Government, and the Government should be accountable to state their position clearly before the Public Utili ties Board in terms of the policy of Government which is enti rely appropriate before you get into the rate sett ing, which is certainly a matter in the PUB jurisdiction. I do not want to get into the situation such as Saskatche wan where the PUB was so rigid tha t th ere was no provision to allow urban subscribers to pa y a little bit more to improve rural telephone services.

The Grant De vine Government, because th ey did not have a decent policy on the PUB, fired the PUB because it could not provide rural telep hone services. They started it, the y did not establish a policy on it, and th ey then fired it when it would not proceed in a way tha t was consistent with Government policy. So I believe th ere has to be some thought made in the Public Insurance Corporation and the Manitoba Hydro proceeding to the PUB. it is just not as simple as saying everything should go th ere.

For example, is the Manitoba Publi c Insurance Corporation going to proceed to the Public Utili ties Board on a strict actuarial basis? Is it going to take a strict actuarial positi on on every issue? Does tha t mean a Government should not say tha t during a farm crisis tha t agriculture vehicles which .are now in essence subsidized , as the Members knows, should be jacked up 40 percent to make it actuarially sound in the middle of a drought, in the middle of agricultural crisis?

So putting something to the PUB is a good consumer issue, but it needs thought, it needs a mandate, it needs a policy. lt needs to be thought out and, with many of th ese Crown corporations - for example, the Pu blic Insurance Corporation - rates should perhaps be almost filed and the policy filed almost toda y because 89 it takes five months. If you look at five months from August i, it is almost at a period of time when the renewals are going out. I also think tha t Crown corporations should in their plans be very extensive.

I do not believe, and I have told the Minister this privately, tha t the Telephone System should file a bureaucratic increase with the Cit y of Winnipeg for a 4.5 percent rate increase and not deal with the rural telephone systems as a total package, because the y both have major impact on the consumers all across this Province and I believe this should be a total package. That is where I disagree with my successor in tha t portfolio.

I think it is unfair to have one hearing on the bureaucratic guidelines of rate increases and have another hearing on the priority tha t all Members of this House share to improve the rural telephone system, but who is going to pay for it? We all know tha t to have one tol l-free calling area in this province will raise every consumer rate in Winnipeg $25 a month. I do not think anybody is suggestin g tha t. I think the balance in-between what we have and where we should be going in a phased -in way should be de alt with in a comprehensive way, not on a piecemeal basis.

We certainly are waiting for the Kopstein Commission. I am sure tha t the Kopst ein Commission will bring us a great deal of findings tha t showed some of the inadeq uacies of the corporation in terms of its management. I would be honest in this House. There was some concern certainly on our part, and tha t is why we created the Kopstein Commission. I would say to thi s House though that we await the findings of the Kopst ein Commission. We expect they will be somewhat critical of some of the management practices of the corporation.

We will work in a cooperative way for motorists in this province, and we would hope the Government brings in good consumer measures tha t we should have brought in in terms of enhancing the Good-Driver Program and enhancing the payment

schedule for our consumers. Certainly thoug h, we would philosophically and totally disagree with the Government if the y introduce any competition into the auto insurance industry in this province. Even though the former Premier Lyon only in his last two days before the last elect ion - he would never admit it before tha t - but in the last two days, when he knew the sands of his mandate were going out, admit ted tha t it was a socialist omelette tha t could not be uns crambled. I do not believe it is a socialist omelette. I think it is a good consumer omelette.

If you unscramble the Public Insurance Corporation in Manitoba, if you open it up to competition, you will have creaming in terms of the good policies. You will have discriminator y practices against our yout h, you will have discriminatory pract ices against farmers, you will have discriminatory pract ices against others in Manitoba who enjoy the advantages of the economy scale of the corporation. The $300 million worth of invest ments that are in the health care system in this province, in the school system in this province and in many of our public enterprises would be put at jeopardy.

Many of th ose corporations would take tha t investment income if th ey are allowed

TUesday , July 26, 1988 to compete and, in the medium term, maybe not the first year, would take tha t money and move it to New York or Zurich or London. We st ill do not know the effects of black Monday on the auto consumers across this country who do not enjoy public insurance in other jurisdiction.

In terms of hydro development, we believe strongly in the tw o-price system, the encouragement of the domest ic system, and I would say we believe tha t hydro is the Manitoba ace in the hole. lt should be used to develop jobs, to develop our economic infrastructure. lt should be used to develop training in the North, it should be used on behalf of all Man itobans, and we will fight the mothb alling of our Manitoba Hydro program right down the line in this Session and the next Session of the Legislature. We not ic ed in the area of McK enzie Seeds - (I nterjection) -tha t is right, she did.

The words speak for thems elves. McKenzie Seeds is a very interesting item . The Tories, I notice, are pretty silent. I not ice the Honourable Minister was qu ite safe. Let us say he was atyp ically safe about McKenzie Seeds in the latest journalisms and sta tements on the McKenzie Seeds. I would say, in the interest of all Manitobans, tha t the Liberal Party of Manitoba has an obligation to clarify th eir position to the people of Brandon.

You cannot make a speech at the Chamber of Commerce at eight thirty in the morning about closing down McKenzie Seeds and tha t evening have your own candidate and your whole Liberal apparatus in the community of Brandon say, oh, we are not really going to do that; we are not really going to close down McKenzie Seeds. I think it is very important tha t an area -(lnterjection) lt reminded me of Abe Kovnats in terms of having things both ways.

No w I think having thin gs both ways may be humourous in this House, it may be humorous in our Debates, but it is not humourous when 300 jobs are on the line and the people and their families do not know the position of the Liberal Party in this area. I would ask and encourage the Liberals to change their minds on this posit ion. lt is one of the most important value-added programs in this province in Brandon. lt is one of the most important world programs outside of Wi nnipeg in terms of industry. lt is a good program. lt is not flush. lt is not going to bring in millions and millions of dollars.

We did not pass the Heritage Fund on tha t particular Crown corporation but it makes a lot of sense for this province. Manfor is another Crown corporation th at I would like to speak on. All parties have agreed tha t Manfor pot entially should be sold to the private sector. I would say, Mr. Speaker, with the greatest of respect, th at if you say you are definitely going to sell Manfor and it is going to be yes, no matter what, you give away some of your bargaining position.

If you say you are going to look at selling it and you are going to talk to corporat ions about selling it and obviously acknowledge tha t it is the best time of the cycle to sell Manfor - and we acknowledge tha t it is by far the best time in the cycle of tha t program -(Interjection) -Mr. Speaker, the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) mentio ned th at he is carrying on with our negotia tions. 90 * ( 15 00) I can assure the First Minister tha t we did not negotia te by saying absolutely yes, no matter what, we are going to sell it.

That is what the Province of Saskatche wan did and th at is why the y gave away the Prince Albert Pulp and Paper Co. to Weyerhaeuser and that is why th ey gave away the corporation for the same amount of money as what the corporation made the next year in one year of operation. Mr. Speaker, never ever give away your bargaining position when you are dealing with very, very capable corporations that the Members opposite are dealing with.

I would suggest that, after th ey have given away their bargaining position, th ey are not going to have the ability to get as good a deal as we potenti ally could have gotten in Manito ba. We will scrutinize the deal when they bring it forward, given the fact the y have given away half their bargaining position. We will scrutin ize the deal to ensure th at there is fair return on Manitoba invest ment, notwithstan ding the fact tha t the CFI when the y started it was a total disaster. We will scrutin ize the fact of the return in terms of the equit y.

We will scrutin ize the sawmill operation in terms of its employment opportunit ies. We will scrutin ize the road growt h concessions that thi s Government may or may not look at. We will scrutin ize the reforestation possibilities. We will scrutinize the agreement to ensure tha t there is not a massive amount of woodland given away to a corporation as they did in the Province of Saskatche wan. We will scrutinize th at deal when it comes forward to this Legislature, bel ieve me.

In terms of financial management, which is again ment ioned in the Speech from the Throne, I again think this Government has gotten off to a terrible, terrible start. lt has talked about financial management and an open, accountable new regime. The first major financial decision they had to make, first of all, it took them two-and-one-half months to make it; and secondly, the y gave the audit to an untendered company in this province, an untendered cont ract in terms of auditing the books with strange coincidences and ties to the Government in power.

I think it is very important th at the Department of Finance numbers tha t were tab led by the former First Minister (Mr. Pawley) in terms of the operating surplus in this province in the last fiscal year, we will be very int erested to see what happens with this outside, untend ered firm in terms of the financial figures it brings back to this House. We have also heard tha t we will have streamlining of our Government departments. We quest ion why you are get ting rid of the Government department dealing with small business.

We quest ion why you are gett ing rid of the Cooperative Development Affairs Department of Government and streamlining tha t position in terms of employment. We think it is absolut ely intolerable tha t the open, accountable Members opposite do not have anything in the Sp eech from the Throne about combining the two incompatible Departments of Labour and Environment, and then proceed the next morning to fire people and announce their decision. Of course, it was the Minister who announced it and not the First Minister in this House. We were left

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 scrambling to wonder who is making the decisions, the Minister or the Premier, in this very important issue. I understand that they have reshuffled a former Deputy Attor ney-General who has no experience in Environment, has no experience in terms of labour law, just resh uffling people into the department. That shows the priority of this Government in terms of labour-management relations and the environment. I am sure all Members opposite will be hammering in on Environment in this upcoming Session of this leg islature.

We again hear the lit any of promises on the phased out payroll tax with nothing specific in the Speech from the Throne. No timetable has been tabled in the Speech from the Throne. I would point out tha t 36,000 jobs were created after we brought in the payroll tax or the health and post-secondary tax. If the y are giving away money and have not got the unemployment rate in a year from now to show for it, the people of Manitoba will hold this Government accountable. We certainly will be pointing tha t out.

In terms of labour legislation, we are quite worried tha t almost 20 strikes have been prevented with the use of final offer selection in the first eight months of its operation. We do not know why the Tories and Liberals are going to decide to repeal this legislation. Innovation is very important . it is not insurmountable to have some innovative legislation with a sunset clause of five years.

If it has prevented close to 20 strikes, if it ha s left us with greater harmony in this province, if there are people who have been using it - both employers and management have filed for this provision in a responsible way - why would Members opposite not want to innovative, and why would the Liberal Party? I would ask them to be open about this idea. lt is working. The only people who get rich with strikes are a few labour lawyers in the city , some of the same labour lawyers who have made the most noise.

Some of the same lawyers who had made a considerable amount of money were the only ones. lt was not businesspeople presenting briefs at the committee. look back at Hansard, it was labour lawyers working for management side. I would just suggest tha t all Members in this House read Justic e Ferg's decision on first contract, where he points out the absolute ridiculous position of the Council of the Cham ber of Com merce in his presentation to the court as guidance of where we are going in this province and who we are listen ing to in terms of the balance in this province. Read.

Do not listen to us. listen to Justice Ferg and read tha t report. In dealing with the economic situation of this province, we have heard tha t the Government has come in with another specific innovat ion and that is to est ablish an Otta wa office. What a great idea tha t is, to establish an Otta wa office. You have the federal Minister Jake Epp th ree rows above the First Minister (Mr.

Filmon), the federal Minister responsible for Manitoba, and this Government wants to blow hundreds of thou sands of dollars away of taxpay ers' money on some office in Ottawa, because they cannot speak to Jake above them or the y cannot pick up the telephone, as the y promised us, with Brian Mulroney. 91 I do not want my ta x dollars going to set up a Tory office in Ottawa. I hope tha t if the y do go ahead with this ridiculous idea, which is an insult to the federal Minister, the y get a credible pu blic employee such as the ADM of Federal-Provincial Affairs like Mr.

Eldridge, and I hope the y do not hire a Tory hack to go down to Ottawa. We will certainly be waiting to see. I would like to again mention the trade agreement and liberalizat ion of trade which is in the Speech from the Throne. We definitely support a much freer trade system in Canada. We have proposed tha t at First Ministers Conferences before. We have proposed th at time and time again at First Ministers Conferences in terms of get ting a fairer trade system in Canada and notwiths tan ding this ridiculous energy deal and resource deal with the United States. We know, Mr.

Speaker, tha t the worst province in Canada in dealing with fair trade, if we want to be honest in this Chamber, the one with the most sanc tions in terms of trade in Canada is Que bec. I would urge the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) to tell the Province of Que bec to come on side in terms of fairer and freer trade in Canada because of their unt enable position in terms of free trade with the United Sta tes and no free trade with the rest of the country. I would also suggest tha t the great free trading Party, the Conservative Party of Canada, has a long way to go itself.

I do not know what they were doing at the First Ministers Conference on the yacht, Mr. Speaker, and it is certainly not the fault of our First Minister (Mr. Filmon) tha t the honourable gentlep erson from British Columbia, the present Premier, had chosen to have a yacht as the site for the West ern Premiers Conference, which showed little regard for the plight of other people in this province or western Canada. But I think it is absolutely atrocious tha t we did not get free trade with the ot her four western provinces. * (15 10 ) Why did we not get free trade with Saskatche wan?

Can our construction com panies now bid in Saskatchewan in the Telephone System? No. Can our construction companies bid on the highway system in Saskatchew an? No. Can the y bid in Alberta? No. Can they bid in Brit ish Colum bia? No. So why, when everybody is preaching about free trade at the Western Premiers Conference, did not the se four compatible peas in a pod come back with a free trade agreement at least in west ern Canada for procurement and supply. An Honourable Member: We need Ronald Reagan in the West . Mr. Doer: We do not need Ronald Reagan in the West.

We have rhetoric on trade and we have nothing on specific action for Manitoba businesses, for Manitoba companies in trade in terms of western Canada. I would suggest tha t conference was a failure for western Canadians in terms of achieving no results in free trade in west ern Canada. We are, as you know, Mr. Speaker, total ly opposed to the proposed trade deal in terms of Canada-U.S. If

Tuesday, Jul y 26, 1988 you do not believe it is not a positiv e thing for United Sta tes, you just have to watch how many ti mes Ronald Reagan is smiling away and the U.S. Senate is smiling away at tha t conti nental deal he has with Canada. You will notic e that the United States is having a lot less trouble gett ing this so-called trade deal through the United States than we are in Canada. I can tell the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) why and his Government why because every briefing note to the Senate, to the Congress and to the U.S.

President has told him tha t not only have we removed some of the tariffs in this country between the two countries but we have achieved our ultima te objective. We have achieved equal access to Canadian energy. We have ach ieved equal access to Canadian resources and we have achieved tha t as part - a little agreement tha t does not even require us to give an exemption in the U.S. Congress Trade Bill tha t is presently before the Congress of the United States and the bill tha t will have to be inte rpreted by a tribunal of United States. lt is absolutely ridiculous, Mr.

Speaker. lt is not free because there is no exemption. You would not buy a house like this. Not one Member opposite would buy a house under the se conditions. There is no exemption from the Congress, its omnibus bill. Secondly, th ere is no trade bill in the free world, only in the Easte rn bloc countries, tha t has energy components and energy access and no prote ction potentially on water basins outside of this province on water. lt is not a trade bill; it is not free; it is not a trade bill.

We have no problem with removing some of the tariffs between the countries, but I think it is absolutely the biggest travesty of justice ever, ever in this country to allow energy, our ace in the hole, to be going down to the south, to go to California in the same way Alberta oil can go to Manitoba. I totally reject it, and Manitoba is a 70 percent net importer of gas and oil. lt is a non renewable resource. We do not have unlimited supply. lt is not there forever. Thank God we have great supplies now. Why would we want to give it away?

To get a few tariffs removed from 80 percent to 10 0 percent, and then we do not even get an exemption on tho se tariffs. I really cannot unde rstand. The rhetoric I can understand, the philosophy of trade I could argue, but the deal - I do not know how anybody can argue, and this is a bad deal for Manitoba. There is no quest ion about it. In terms of health care, we have a very articula te Minister in health care.

He is very very articulate, a very articulate Minister of health care, but he is so articulate somet imes, he gets himself all wound up and he looks like he is in a little pretzel going every different way. I thought it was absolutely tragic tha t such a serious issue of our staffi ng the medical facilities outside of Winnipeg, a very legitima te issue for all of us, was treated in such an indiscriminate way in terms of the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard).

I know he wrapped himself in a little cute pretzel trying to say: "I did not say this, I did not say tha t." But when one looked back over the Free Press tape recorder tha t was qu oted verbatim, the Minister doth protesteth too much, I think. I guess the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) had to take the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) to the woodshed, 92 just like he probably had to take t he Minister of Highways (Mr. Driedger) to the woodshed, a man who I think all Members of this House respect.

But I could just imagine the expression on the First Minister when he heard the CJOB Action Line play for three days in a row about toll roads on highways - a tax on Tories. I imagine the First Minister was apoplectic and, oh, the Minister of Highways was in the woodshed. I hope he went easy on you. I can imagine it. I think Highway 75 is going to be great , but to watch the Minister twist and turn gett ing the money, we were doing it on a gradual basis.

We have roads and we have bridges, but I would love to ha ve been a fly on the wall when the Minister of Highways joined the Minister of Health in the woodshed with the First Minister. lt would have been qu ite hilarious. The aging population and the cost of our health care syst em are very very major issues for us. We know we have a twisting and turning and cute Minister of Health. We do not want task forces, we do not want or need st udies, we do not want advisory councils, we do not want stud ies, we do not want consulta tion, we want act ion in terms of dealing with our full range of medical resources.

We want act ion on acute care beds, we want act ion on extended care beds, we want action on nursing home beds, we want act ion on the home care worker system that this Government promised when they were in Opposition. We believe th at lifestyle and health care prevention is still the cornerstone for all of us in politic al life, and we doubled the health care prevention budget in our last go-round, a budget th at was defeated by both polit ical Parties opposite. We want to see the beef when the health care budget comes down before thi s House in terms of prevention.

In terms of mental healt h, we will work cooperatively with the Mem bers opposite in mental health. There is no question, all over North America, the greatest mental health resources are with the people who have mental health problems but are not the most acutely mentall y ill. The system is set up backwards. The hospitals with the most acute care medical health problems and mental health problems have the fewest resources and fewest psychiatrists.

Whether we like it or not, a person in private practice as a psychiatrist can do a lot better and have a lot more autonomy in private practice than the y can in Government practice. We will not take cheap polit ical sho ts if the Government improves the resources for doctors in our mental health system. I will urge them to do that. I believe our finest and most major resources should be with the people who are the most mentally ill and, by definition, th at is in our health care facilities and institutions.

We remain committed to working with the Government to have a fair program of having people return to their com mun ities and having adeq uate resources in our mental health system, and I would be the first to admit tha t there is a lot of work ahead of us jointly in tha t area. We have already commented on the day care program and the child care program, Mr. Speaker, in Question Period. There is report after report after report after task force after task force after task force we do not need. All Governments, all politi cal stripes, all Parties

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 have done their stud ies. lt is time to act on child care. The New Democrats have led the way. lt is time for this Min ister and thi s Government to get off the proverbial study route to take away the umbrella of a task force and get on with a program for Manitobans in child care. We do not want to be the last car in the barn in terms of this important issue as we are right now. I really want to see specific act ion in the justic e system, action tha t is devoid and lacking in the Speech.

I want to work with the Government, and our Party wants to work with the Government in dealing with the present drought situa tion, to deal with a cooperative approach on the drought situation th at has hit Manitob ans, particularly in southw est Manitoba, in a very severe way. We will work with this Government on the pressure on education tax on farm land but we do not agree with the methodol ogy, qui te frankly, of the Members opposite in allowing the education tax to be removed on farm land, for land held by banks, for land held by foreign interests, etc.

We want to work with you on the real challenges, but we sometimes have different ways of going about it. We would like to work with you on the intolerable grain subsidies tha t are hurting our farmers. We would like to work in an all-Party way to deal with the long term potential impact of the greenhouse effect. Whether it is in hydro, whether it is in our natural resources, in our lakes, whether it is in the agricultural sector, whether it is working with you in terms of diversification of crops, we would like to work with you.

I admit tha t I have only spent about four summers on a farm across from the Member for Ste. Rose du Lac (Mr. Cummings) in Neepawa and I have got some good stories from this last summer dealing with the Member for Neepawa's youth, but i would not want my stories repeated as well. .. (15 20) We are going to work with our experts in agriculture in a very cooperative way with this Government in dealing with our joint challenge in terms of the drought and the situa tion. I am very frankly worried, and I keep repeating the whole issue of the environment.

The environment is a major priority. lt cannot be shuffled off in a bureaucratic reorganization. it cannot be shuffled off because you do not want a Deputy Attorne y-General. We cannot give second-st ring appointments in terms of their expertise to a first-string priority of this province, and tha t is the environment. I do not respect the present position of the Government of Manitoba in terms of the Rafferty Aiameda Dam. I do not believe tha t we can trust the Devine Go vernment.

You can talk about all the cooperation and ni ce meet ings you want, but the Rafferty-Aiameda project will affect the Sou ris River system. The Member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) knows it, and we want a national environmental impact study . We do not want Brian Mulroney . . . An Honourable Member: I thought you did not want studies. 93 Mr. Doer: You know this is a different issue and it is too serious. We do not want the Minister to waive the impact study on Manitoba because the Prime Minister and Grant Devine just picked up the phone and made a little deal. We think tha t is atrocious.

An Honourable Member: You sat on it for three years. Mr. Doer: The environmental impact study was our position, Mr. Speaker, and I do not blame the Member for Arthur (Mr. Downey) for being sensit ive because, when the Souris River dries up, he will be accountable to the people of Manitoba and his constitue ncy when tha t happens. We need . . . An Honourable Member: Take a look at it toda y and see how much water is in it. Mr. Mr. Doer: Yes, take it by half and take it down again. That is a very intell igent approach. Mr. Speaker, we support the Government on a joint water strategy for this Province.

We do not support jus t non-specific words and the tr eatment of the Environment Department in a second-class way, as we have seen in the first three days in this House by the First Minister (Mr. Filmon). The urban challenges have been noted in the Speech from the Throne. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why the City of Brandon was not menti oned in the Speech from the Throne. in terms of urban challenges, I think Brandon is definitely an urban centre, and I think we all agree in this House on that.

I also cannot understand, after we spent the time last year and all th ree Parties spent the time with City Council to establish the 29 council lors and the Independent Bounda ry Commission, the Members opposite, when th ey were in Opposition, did not raise one concern in commit tee. The Members opposite did not raise one concern on the size of City Council in the Ho use in terms of the Bill tha t was before the House. The Members opposite did not raise any particular concerns or objections. They did not vote against any part of it.

City Council had agreed to it, because we all know tha t one councillor per 22,0 00 is more appropriate in a democratic accountable system than one councillor for 32,0 00 or 33,000 people. You can play a politi cal game on decreasing the size of Cit y Council - we all know tha t - but I believe the rights of the cit izens of Winnipeg are very important in terms of their representation because city councillors get more constitue ncy work on their plate on a day to-day basis than we do even as MLAs. I think we should be intel lectually honest in the way we vote in this House.

We should be intellectually honest in the positions we take in this Ho use. We should be intel lectually hone st in the positions we vote in commit tee. We should be intelle ctually honest when we try to change our mind less than 12 months after the Bill was passed by all sides of this Legislature. lt is all part of the same problem, Mr. Speaker. The tough decisions such as the responsibilities of the Mayor, the accountabil ity of City Cou ncil, the

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 relationship of City Council to its citizens has been left aside by this Government, and the easy thing of tampering with the size of City Council is going to be picked up as a major challenge by this decisive group across. 1t is not a good decision, but I understand the popularity in the short term of tink ering with tha t only one measure.

In terms of Culture and Heritage, we are totally upset with the fact tha t the North has been disenfranchised in terms of the criteria, tha t Garden Hill has been denied their grant to esta blish apprentice ship programs to build their Community Assets Program and, at the same time, the Charleswood Golf Course proceeds. We think th ey both had some legitima cy in terms of job creation and community asset s, and I would think that the people of Garden Hill are very concerned in terms of what the y believe the y heard Mr. First Minister (Mr.

Filmon) in the election promise campaign -(Int erjection)-Yes, they do certain ly, Mr. Speaker, and I spoke to them. We are pleased tha t the projects we initia ted such as the French Festival and the Folk Festival and Folklorama are proceeding, and I notice the present Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) took some good shots at us when we supported the Folk Fest ival. I am glad to see he has got his sandals on. I am glad to see he has proceeded to enjoy some folk music. Mo st Manitobans have been very proud of the Folk Fest ival. There are some advanta ges of a minority Government, particularly with tha t bunch.

They could not hack and slash the Folk Festival because the y knew it would not be supported in this House by the elected MLAs. In terms of the Constitutional Accord, Meech Lake, we are pleased tha t it is proceeding to the public debate. We have stated before our strong recognition of the posit ive parts of the Meech Lake Accord in terms of our Canadian constitutional process. I know there are weaknesses in tha t accord. I have articulated th ose from the day I was first asked.

We believe tha t the way in which we should deal in our public hearings is consistent with our Manitoba responsibilit ies and our Canadian responsibilities. I, qu ite frankly, think tha t Meech Lake is gett ing much better att ention paid to it than the'82 accord which was developed - where was it, Mama Theresa Rest aurant? I am not sure what kitchen it was. But the accord in'82, I think, has even more weaknesses, qu ite frankly, than the existing accord with the opti ng-out clause and some of the other provisions.

I know tha t the former Members know where the recommendation came from, the opti ng-out clause. lt was a Member formerly of this House, now a Member who may have to int erpret parts of it on the Bench at a later date. I think tha t was the worst - the checkerboard constitution I have always been opposed to. I think I would have much preferred this kind of process in this sect ion. it is very interesting in this Session. Two out of th ree Parties must pass every Bill; two out of th ree Parties could defeat every Bill. lt is a very int eresting dynamic. We have recognized the fact of our findings on April 26.

We were quite aware of what was going to happen, obviously before tha t date. We have a silver lining in this cloud of course, because we know that the ss two 94 out of three Parties can pass things, defeat things or whatever. lt makes it qu ite int eresting. An Honourable Member: Sharon said th at she was in control. Do not tell us tha t you are in controL Mr. Doer: No, I am not. I am not in controL Two out of th ree Parties to pass Bills, two out of th ree Parties to defeat Bills, and that is why we are not just proceeding in this Session of the Leg islature to be critical and negative.

We are also proceeding with some positiv e init iati ves in terms of proposing legislation. We are going to propose tha t we prohibit Hydro from not being allowed to have a two-pricing system . You agree tha t it is already consistent with policy. We agree. I am sure we will have unanimous consent on the Bill we are going to pass in terms of the Canada-U.S. trade deal on the ability of pricing hydro. We are going to propose parents-in-the-workplace legislation to deal with the st resses in the workplace.

We are going to deal with some of the problems in terms of notice time and other provisions for communiti es for plant closure. We are going to provide some recommendations on smoking in public places in terms of the health of Manitoba. We are going to provide some landlord-tenant protect ion act. We have already introduced some posit ive provisions to deal with the small business, The Brick's Furniture. Our colleague from Elmwood has brought in tremendous legislation in terms of the policy of Manitoba. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, Manitobans did elect a minority Government on April 26.

We are commit ted to working in a posit ive way on behalf of Manitobans. We strongly urge this Government to consider, at every decision, fairness to Manitobans and their families - who benefits, who is harmed by all of their measures. We believe the mem bers who have elected us to protect their interests in terms of fairness and workingpeople and their families in this province. We believe we can be productive in this Session if the Parties are flexible, constructi ve and cooperative.

We will not be moving any motion on the Speech from the Throne, and we intend to work in a very posit ive way on behalf of our constituents and all Manitobans. HANSARD CORRECTION Hon. James Downey {Minister for Northern Affairs): I rise to make a correct ion in Ha nsard, the first opportunity tha t I have had. I am sure tha t the Member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) would want to make sure tha t this was not a reference made to his colleague. I refer you to page 50 of Hansard which just is tabled and the references made - and I am sure tha t it is not any form of a racial slur of any kind.

I hope it would not be and I am sure it is not, tha t he referred to the Minister of Northern Affairs, and I quote, "Mr. Speaker, there is an obligation, and this falls upon the shoulders of the Minister responsible for Northern Affairs," and it refers to Mr. Harper, "and if th ere is such an animal, the Minister responsible for Native Affairs, the obligation to implement the . . . "

Tuesday, July 26, 1988 I just say tha t there should be a correction as to Mr. Harper, but also I would think tha t the Member should take advisedly that kind of te rminology when it refers to any person or group of people in our society. .. (15 30) Hon . Albert Dr iedger (M inister of Gov ern men t Services): First of all, I want to say tha t I enjoyed the comments of the Leader of the Second Opposition Party, and I think he is a tremendous Leader for the Second Opposition Party. I think he did a good job. I could probably spend 40 minutes of my com ments debating some of the issues tha t he brought forward.

I think possibly that, if he had spoken tha t way during the campaign, he might be the first official party, instead of the second official party. lt is a great pleasure to be able to partici pate once again in a Throne Speech Debate. I think, since '77, this is probably my most exciting one, because this time I have the opportunity of being involved in the Throne Speech as a Minister of the province. For myself, it is a proud moment, and I am very excited about it. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to congratula te you on your responsibility .

Knowing you from the past, I know you will adjudicate fairly. I think all Members of the House are going to be wo rking together with you in conjunction to make the House work properly, especially under the circumstan ces where we have a very unique situation in terms of a minority Government. I want to take this opportunity to welcome all the new Members. lt has been a dramatic change tha t has taken place all around the Chamber.

In fact, I would think it is probably one of the biggest changes tha t has ever taken place in terms of act ually changing of num bers, and most certa inly in terms of the circumstan ces tha t we have right now. Everybody has either a new responsibility or a changed responsibilit y. Every time we have an election, we end up with a new scenario, and it is always a very exciting thing until we get to know each other to know how everybody operates. Most of us really enjoy each other. Some have not tha t kind of personalit y, maybe do not enjoy each other tha t much. I have always been one who has enjoyed them all.

Unique things happen from time to time. In the past, under the previous administration, we had two brothers involved who were both Ministers in Cabinet. In this present Session, we have two Driedgers involved; they happen to be cousins. One is sit ting on your side of the House and one is sit ting over here. I wish him well on tha t side for a long time. it is int eresting enough . . . I think it is a very exciting time. I can recall back to when I first won my election in '77, get ting into this big Chamber in here, a boy from the country. I was awed by what was happening.

I recall my first speech, when I got up and I always thought I could speak to some degree. I was told I was a little mout hy. Then I got in th ere and had a mike in front of me, and knowing everything was recorded, the trepidations tha t go through you, and it sort of makes it very awkward. The first speech tha t I had occasion 95 to make in this House, I read most of it and did that poorly. I am not saying tha t the speaking has improved tha t much on my part, but I enjoy it much more and I feel much more relaxed. So I can appreciate when new Members make their first speeches in the House.

When the y have some trepidations, some concerns, tha t will all change after a while. For some, Mr. Speaker, it comes very easy. They get up - and I must say tha t some of the speeches that have taken place to date already with some of the new Members have been good speeches, good quality speeches. I was very impressed. Our Mover (Mr. Praznik) and Seconder (Mr. Gil lesh ammer), both bei ng newcomers in the House, spoke well, articulated their concerns. Members opposite, the Mem ber for Selkirk (Mrs. Charles), I thought spoke well the other day. Of course, the Second Opposition Leader (Mr.

Doer) spoke well toda y too, but he has been here for a while. I just want to indicate to the Members, "Enjoy it while you are here," for all of us. The average lifespan of a politician in this Legislature is slightly less than six years. That gives you something to think about. When you consider tha t we have some senior Members like the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns) who has been here over 20 years, the Member for Brandon East (Mr. L.S. Evans) who is leaving now, I think, is on the verge of 19 years.

When you consider that you have some senior Members here who have contributed for many years for a long time, some of you will not be around after the next election. That is a shocking thought, but almost one-third change almost every time. So as I indicated, "Enjoy while we are here." I also firmly believe, as I think the Leader for the N.D . Party (Mr. Doer) indicated, tha t most people are sincere about doing their best in this House. We might have different philosophies, but l think the majority of people who are elected to serve the public do it in a very sincere and dedicated manner.

The public does not always agree and changes them because of th ose views. But the st igma tha t very often is att ributed to politicians - we are not necessarily the most popular people in society - people treat politicians with a bit of a downward cast from time to time, figuring th at because we are spending public money tha t everybody could be corrupt. So we are not tha t popular.

When we talk of self-interest, I think tha t the monies tha t MLAs get, by and large, if anybody is in here for money, he better rethink his position because the pay is not tha t good and certainly life expectanc y is not tha t long. I would like to take this opportunit y, Mr. Speaker, to pay a tribute to th ose Members who are not with us here toda y who were here in the past . That would include - I can recall right from '77 on - some of the people who made major contributions in this House: good debaters, good politicia ns, sincere individuals.

I could use names like Sid Green, who was in an opposite Party from myself, who I always found a great orator. He could take almost any issue and speak at length about it, and do it well. He would hold the att ention of the whole House. He spoke well on whatever issue he picked. I never agreed with any of the issues that he had, but he spoke well on th ese thi ngs.

Thesday, July 26, 1988 There are other Members who I would like to take this opportunit y in terms of paying tribu te to some of my colleagues. Not everybody in this House gets defeated . The majority do but th ere are some who step down of their own free well. The Member for Rhineland (Mr. Brown), the Member for Minnedosa (Mr. Blake), are Members who chose not to run again, and were senior Members in here, had served well.

I would like to pay a little tribute to one of my colleagues who I worked very closely with all the tim e, the former Member for Niakwa, Abe Kovnats. lt just so happened tha t Abe and me are patch ing things up now because my cousin happened to be the fellow who beat him out of there. But Abe does not hold tha t against me. Incidentally , the Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), I made reference to him already.

I believe he is the senior Member tha t we have in the Legislature, has served very capably for many, many years. 1 would like to take this opportun ity as well to congratula te the Liberal Party as such, as a group. To come from one Member to 20 Members, I think is a great feat . I would like to just look at it in the sense the Member for Minnedosa (Mr. Gilleshammer) in his seconding of the Throne Speech indicated the sort of segregat ion tha t has taken pla ce with our Party maybe holding predominantly the rural seats. The city seats are basically Liberal in the city and the north represented by th e NDP.

I feel very confident tha t all Members in the various three Parties are going to work to try and meld tha t type of thing. We certainly will have tha t opportunit y working as a minority Government, which is a very unique experience certainly for myself, and I think for most us. I feel the people of Ma nitoba - it might not be the way tha t I would have wanted it to happen. I would have liked to have a strong majority, and you feel a little bit more comfortable doing that. But I think the people of Manitoba, by and large, feel relatively comfortable with a minority Government.

They feel tha t the y are going to get good Government, tha t we will have to work together and I feel tha t, under the leadership of our Premier, we will be coming forward with policies in a direct ion tha t is going to be accept able. I hope tha t nobody has in mind tha t the y can call an elect ion very shortly. I have had the occasion of having four of them, and I would like to ha ve a little break in-between time somewhere if possible. (Mr. Deputy Speaker, M.

Minenko, in the Chair.) I think, given the opportun ity, tha t the people of Manitoba will be able to assess the performance of all of us in this House in such a way tha t we can have their confidence, tha t the y feel tha t we are moving in the right direction. *

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-1-4
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 1st hansardpdf 4.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	89ba51e192bb36060eee631594129517bcc93c05

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