Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 70B (33rd Legislature, 1st Session)

33-1-70b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

First Session - Thirty-Third Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 35 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Myrna A. Phillips Speaker ISSN 0542 -54 92 VOL. XXXIV No. 708 - 8:00 p.m., TUESDAY, 19 AUGUST, 1986. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Third Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME ASHTON, Steve BAKER, Clarence BIRT, Charles T. BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, Hon. John M. CARSTAIRS, Sharon CONNERY, Edward J. COWAN, Hon. Jay CUMMINGS, J. Glen DERKACH, Len DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent L. DOER, Hon. Gary DOLIN, Marty DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert DUCHARME, Gerry ENNS, Harry J. ERNST, Jim EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. FILMON, Gary FINDLAY, Glen M. HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Hon. Harry M. HARAPIAK, Hon. Leonard E. HARPER, Hon. Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOVNATS, Abe LECUYER, Hon. Gerard MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. Al MALOWAY, Jim MANNESS, Clayton McCRAE, James C. MERCIER, Q.C., G.M.J. (Gerry) MITCHELSON, Bonnie NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte L. ORCHARD, Donald W. PANKRATZ, Helmut PARASIUK, Wilson PAWLEY, O,C., Hon. Howard R. PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Hon. Myrna A. PLOHMAN, Hon. John ROCAN, C. Denis ROCH, Gilles (Gil) SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Q.C., Hon. Victor SCOTT, Don SMITH, Harvey SMITH, Hon. Muriel STORIE, Hon. Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill WALDING, D. James WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Hon.

Judy CONSTITUENCY Thompson Lac du Bonnet Fort Garry Minnedosa Rhineland Gimli River Heights Portage la Prairie Churchill Ste. Rose Roblin-Russell St. Boniface Concordia Kildonan Arthur Emerson Riel Lakeside Charle swood Brandon East Tuxedo Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Swan River Rupertsland Logan Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Nia kwa Radisson St. James Elmwood Morris Brandon West St. Norbert River East Assiniboia Gladstone Pembina La Verendrye Transcona Selkirk Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Springfield Burrows Rossmere lnk ster Ellice Osborne Flin Flon Interlake St. Vital St.

Johns PARTY NOP NOP PC PC PC NOP LIBERAL PC NOP PC PC NO P NOP NOP PC PC PC PC PC NO P PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP NOP PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC PC NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 19 August, 1986. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ATTORNEY-GENERAL MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: The comm ittee will reconvene. We are dealing on Page 19 with Resolution 19,

Section 4. Law Enforcement, (

b) Law Enforcement Adm inistration -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(b)( 1)-pass; 4.(b)(2)- pass. 4.(

c) Canada-Manitoba Gun Control -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: What's the reason for the reduction? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Min ister. HON. R. PENNER: The gun control officer, whom we had with us for a considerable period of time left, and we were able to fill it at a lower level. We reclassified the pos ition. As we've been devel oping the law enforcement unit, we've been able to double up on some functions. In the year before, built into the 81, 700 was some severance pay for the person who retired. MR. G.

MERCIER: A question I was going to ask - I could have asked in the previous one -but there was a story about Parks Police in the City of Winnipeg, who wanted to be able to carry guns, the constables who patrol major City of Winnipeg parks. Is that under consideration by the department? HON. R. PENNER: No, that's strictly city and I wouldn't ordinarily be very supportive of that. MR. G. MERCIER: Would or wouldn't? HON. R. PENNER: Would not. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(c)( 1)-pass; 4.(c)(2)- pass. 4.(

d) Manitoba Police Comm ission -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, essentially all the Police Commission does is hear the odd appeal from the Law Enforcement Review Agency and is active in the crime prevention area. It's a relatively small amount of money in comparison to the total budget. I wonder why the Attorne y-General doesn't consider abolishing the Police Commi ssion or turn it into special crime preve ntion, or assistance to victims of crime, etc., sec tions. Or is the Attorney-General putting all of the programs for assistance to victims, or crime prevention, in this area? HON. R.

PENNER: In fact, we're considering going somewhat the other way. There has been a reduction in staff and it follows in program capability when the former executive dir ector of the Manitoba Police Commission, Max Mulder -you will remember him - left. We didn't replace him, not because we thought he was irrepla ceable, and we have been looking at the function of the Manitoba Police Commission since, perhaps rather tardily . It's true it has, at the moment, apparently, a minor function in that it has an appellate function from a decision of the LERA Comm issioner.

It also has where the disciplinary act ion of a commission, or its equivalent, does not involve a thir d-party question as an appella te function under The Provincial Police Act. We've been discussi ng this situation with the Manitoba Pol ice Comm ission and it is long felt that indeed there is a larger function for it to play not primarily in the area of crime preven tion. I think it accepts the notion that crime prevention perhaps should best be deli vered by the developing Crime Prevention Centre.

In terms of the development of a whole number of protocols for the various police forces, protols having to do with training, having to do with high-speed chases, having to do with safety equipment, having to do with matters of that kind -recruiting and trai ning, we have been meeting with members of the Commis sion in recent weeks trying to see if we can scare up the resources to beef it up so that indeed if we can at least examine these functional components.

And we have asked that a comple te review of The Provincial Polic e Act be done and recommendations be made for a thorough revision of The Provincial Police Act. It's out of date. It has, you'll recall, bits and pieces from many years ago when there was a provincial police force and it has some more recent bits and pieces. So we want that examined in the context of re-examining the function of the Comm ission itself. MR. G.

MERCIER: Has the Attorney-General consulted with the RCMP and the City of Winnip eg Police Force about their perceived need for a provincial bureaucracy under the Police Commission to develop protocols for them? HON. R. PENNER: There has been consultation with the Winnip eg Police Association and they are highly suppo rtive of this notion of an independent body that has the op portu nit y, separate and apart from a management func tion, to look at such thi ngs as equipment, safety, protocols with respect to high-speed chases, protocols with respect to dealing with victims of sexual abuse, and so on. MR. G.

MERCIER: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.( d)(1)-pass; 4.(d)(2)-pa ss. 4.(

e) Law Enforcement Review Act -the Member for St. Norb ert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, the Law Enforcement Review Agency issued its first report for, I believe, its 3140

Tuesday, 19 August, 19 86 first 11 months of activity. I suppose, depending on your approach to this agen cy, on the one hand you would say it was in view of the fact that they made no findings of any police misconduct, you would say it is an entirely useless agency and a waste of money. On the other hand, if you approach it from a different perspective, I suppose from the Attorney-General 's point of view, he may say that the record just shows what a great influence it had on police conduct during that period of time. Would I be correct in identifying you with the latter assessment? HON. R.

PENNER: In fact, I think it's a bit early to make any kind of definitive assessmen t. I think everyone with preconceived notions about the Law Enforcement Review Agency is somewhat surprised at the relatively low level of activity. Incidental ly, I have a more recent statistical report, up to June 30, 1986, and I'll give the figures. They're not much different, really, as a matter of fact, than those that are contained in the briefing material. With so many variables, I think it would be a bit pretentious to draw conclusions.

I wouldn't, for example, draw the conclusion that because LERA is there, the police who were egregiously misb ehaving are now behavi ng, because I don't think it was the case that we had an undisciplined police force. We had some problems; there still are problems. Some of them are internal; some of them are external in dealing with third parties. It may be, as I say, that it's too early in the day to assess the functioning of the Commission.

I do note, and perhaps that's why we only have the tip of a relatively small iceberg to assess, that of the complaints accepted for investiga tion, a substantial number were resolved informally; 25, for example, in the first period from the first 11 months from February 1, 1985 to December 31, 19 85. Of the total of 11 2 that were actually accepted for investigation, 25 were dealt with by informal resolution. I think that's good.

I think that does ind icate one positive role that we expected earlier to be able to pl ay, and that is to be able to point out to the person against whom a complaint is made that the behaviour of which the complaint was made is not the kind that would result in severe discipline, and indeed perhaps can be dealt with informally by a meeting between the citizen and the police officer. If that's what's happening, as I think it is, that's all to the good. MR. G. MERCIER: I didn't see it in the report, but is the Attorney-General aware of whether there were any thi rd-party complaints?

That was an issue, as he will recollect. HON. R. PENNER: I have no information before me on that particular point. I'll have to take that as notice. I'm advised by the Director of Police Services that there are some. It's not a large num ber, but there have been some. MR. G. MERCIER: It would be interesting to have that information for last year and perhaps have it included in the report next year. 3141 HON. R. PENNER: I think that's a good sugges tion. I'll accept it. MR. G. MERCIER: How is the total of $12 2,500 broken down? HON. R.

PENNER: We have two SY's for a total of 96,200, and then Other Expenditures of 26,300, for a total budget for the unit of 11 9,500.00. Is that the figure that the member was asking about? MR. G. MERCIER: There are two SY's. How are those broken down? HON. R. PENNER: You have the Commi ssioner and one support staff. MR. G. MERCIER: So how mu ch does the Comm issioner . . . HON. R. PENNER: The Commi ssioner is somewhere in the $60,000's, a Senior Officer 6 at around 69,000.00. The balance of that salary account would be for the support staff.

I should point out inc idental ly, the way we're managing, it's not as if that's the only support that the Comm issioner has. We've placed the Comm issioner and his function in a line relationship with the Director of Police Services, so that if the Commi ssioner requires investigation, we're able to use the investigative facilities that we have with the Director of Police Services. If they need additional support staff, additional to the one that they have, they're able to rely on the support staff that's in that unit general ly. MR. CHAIRMAN: (e)(1)-pass; (e)(2)-pass.

Resolution 19: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $29,4 62,800 for Attorney-General, Law Enforcement for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1987- pass. Resolution 20, No. 5. Court Services, 5.(

a) Court Admi nistration -the Member for St. Norb ert. MR. G. MERCIER: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.( a)(1)-pass; 5.(a)(2)-pass. (

b) Federal Courts -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: What is the time or delay in setting the matter down for trial now in the Court of Queen's Bench? HON. R. PENNER: I'll just have to go by way of recollec tion. My understa nding is, because of the way in whic h the Family Division is functioning at considerable improvement in terms of the numb er of things which have to go to trial, and because of the use now of pre-trial conferences, that the time within which something can be set down for trial has been reduced remarkably. But I can't give you the exact figure now.

I'll try to have it and supply it to the member in writing. But it has gone down a lot. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Brandon West.

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 MR. J. McCRAE: There's been a need expressed in the Brandon area for change s to our courthouse and perhaps involving an expansion. Can the Minis ter tell us what plans there are for an expansion to the Brandon Courthouse? HON. R. PENNER: I'm advised by the ADM of Court Services, Marvin Bruce, is here with us tonight, that a meeting has taken place with the people in Brandon and their putting a package for subm ission of the '87- 88 Estimates. Now, at this stage, it's too early for me to say what success it will have.

I haven't previously been briefed on the need or the potential cost or where it might fit into the total capital requirements of the department. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr. Chairman, I think more and more the need is becoming greater in Brandon and with the possible expansions coming up, we're going to see more need there for an expansion for our courthouse, so I ask the Min ister to keep that in the back of his mind for the next while. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, at what stage is the whole Law Courts renovation project at now? HON. R.

PENNER: Everyt hing except the renovation of the old Land Titles Office is on schedule, and in fact slight iy ahead of schedule, I think in terms of the renovation of the old Law Courts. The tenders were called on the Land Titles renovation; it came in a lot higher than budget because between the time the concept was originally put together and now, the construction industry, at least that

section of the construction industry, has heated up to the point where bids generally are coming in higher than original estimates. So we had to look around in the capital budget of Government Services which deliv ers that

section of the capital budget, to see if the extra could be made up and a package is being put together for Treasury Board. It's on Treasury Board agenda for the 26th. If, I'm advised, it passes Treasury Board, as I'm confident it will or I hope it will, then we'll be on stre am. MR. G. MERCIER: That will be the Court of Appeal judge, will it not? HON. R. PENNER: Court of Queen's Bench Chambers. MR. G. MERCIER: That's all that will be in the Land Titles Office. HON. R. PENNER: That's all that there will be in the Land Titles. MR. CHAIRMAN: (b)(1)-pass; (b)(2)-pass. (

c) Provincial Court -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: What is the situation now with provincial judges? Is the Attorney-General negotiating on an annual basis with them as to salaries? HON. R. PENNER: There are ongoing dis cussions. I don't know if the member is aware that in fact we gave the provincial judges, about a year ago, a substantial increase in two phases, bringing them up to about the mid-level of western payments. At the same time it was agreed that they should not be, as they previously were, tied to Civil Service increases.

We were really talking meaningfully about the independence of the judiciary, that their salaries should be negotiated separately or at least dealt with separately. We have in preparation in the department a paper with respect to the provincial judges.

It deals with a whole num ber of issues, one of which is a way of dealing with the salary of provincial judges that would perhaps, as an option, be the equivalent of the way in which normally we deal with the salaries of members of the Legislative Assembly, so that it's relatively free from the ups and downs and the suggestion of political politics, playing a role and setting their remuneration for provincial judges. So we're looking at that, looking at the possibility of a supernumerary category, to give a little more flexibility in the employment of judges who may want to retire.

As the member knows, there is no manda tory retirement and there may be some judges who are now past the normal age of retirement who would, I think, gladly retire if there was the possibility of some remune ration as supernumeraries and that would really be to the benefit of the department as a whole and to Cabinet, so we're looking at that in the same package. MR. G. MERCIER: Are magistrates at the Public Safety Building under this sect ion? HON. R. PENNER: They are. MR. G. MERCIER: Are they supposed to provide service all evening on weekends at the Public Safety Building? HON. R.

PENNER: As the member may recall, we established the category of bail magistrates, to use that short term, and had, under the direction of Chief Provincial Judge Gyles, two or three persons who actually did the night time and weekend duty. With the retirement-resignation of two of those three in the last two or three months, Chief Gyles has been able to call upon the services of magistrates who are in the Law Courts complex for that service with some I guess overtime and arrangements of that kind. It seems to be working satisfactorily. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I don't think the question was answered .

Are they supposed to provide service all even ing? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, there are duty magis trates available all evening and all weekend. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I would ask the Attorney-General to make some further inq uiries, because I raise a personal experience, having been called by a friend of -not a friend, but by parents of two young 19-year-olds on the evening of the Friday leading into the July 1 long weekend, and being called about 1:30, I was advised that the magistrate had gone home and wouldn't be back until the morning.

I'm sure this repeats itself numerous times and I'm not raising a personal matter for any personal reasons. 3142

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 I'm sure it could have happened to any numb er of people, but this was a situation where two 19-year olds ended up staying overnight and were not released until about noon the following day on a very minor matter, more raised over confusion and what I would simply not regard in any way as any sort of criminal offence, and young kids without any previous record. It may have been a good experience for them to stay overnight, who's to know, but on balance I don't think it was.

I think it was very inappr opriate that they be required to spend the whole evening until the following day, Saturday at noon, before they were released on bail. It certa inly caused their family and parents a great deal of concern as well as themselves. So the facts, as it appears to me, there are not 24-hour bail magis trates on duty. Maybe there's a problem with the numb er of bail magis trates available.

I would never advocate that everyone should be automatically released on bail, as really happens, but I would say if that is happening every week end, there are some legitimate cases in justice for people who should not be required to spend the night in the Public Safety Building and I think these two young men were two prime examples. HON. R. PENNER: I would agree, and I'm going to ask the member to provide me with further details and have the matter looked into. The person who's duty mag istrate, usually for a week on in rotation, has to be available at all of the duty hours from five till the morning.

That's what is supposed to be. If they go home, they're sup posed to be on the beeper. Certain ly, if the member was informed that there was no one available, then he was misinformed and I think that has to be looked into and will. MR. G. MERCIER: For the record, the information I received at about 1:30 - 2 o'clock was th at the magis trate had gone home, would not be back till 10 o'clock the next morning and that there was no sense expecting these kids to be released before noon. HON. R.

PENNER: Somebody was covering for that magis trate, in my opinion, and that's a surmise on my part, but we'll certainly look into it. That ought not to have happened. MR. G. MERCIER: I'd appreciate it, if after the Attorney General looks into it, he could let me know the results of this investigat ion. HON. R. PENNER: If the member will provide us with the details, it will be looked into tomorrow. MR. G. MERCIER: Under this area, would the Fine Option Program come or is that more Communi ty Services? HON. R. PENNER: Community Ser.vices. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 5.(c)( 1)-pass; 5.(c)(2)-pass. 5.(d)( 1) Court Reporters -the Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: I note two court reporter positions have been abolished . I understand we're entering into a court monitor system to some extent. Would those court reporter positions abolis hed be taken up under the court monitor program or are they just abolished forever and what's happ ening with th e mon itor program? HON. R.

PENNER: First of all, nothing is forever, but in fact the positions have been abolished because it's expected that with the development of the court monitoring project that there would be a reduction over th ree years of approximately 10 positions. That's the information I have. Just a word of explanation for the record. At present, court reporting services are provided by court reporter positions classified as Court Reporters 1-3; and what this proposal does is to create the position of monitor transcriber and Clerk of the Court by converting future vacant court reporter positions.

We're not bumping anybody, but if a position becomes vacant, somebody's unlu cky enough to be elected, for example, we would reduce the numb er of court reporters by two. That's in this fiscal year. Now what happens, I think the member's as familiar as I am, is that in many courts we know that it will be the exception that a transcript is called for and so it's efficient, at least where we're trying this out, to have instead of a Clerk of the Court and a court reporter, we're having someone in the sense who functions as both.

The term "monitor" means that if the function of the Clerk of the Court who normally says, "All rise, the Judge is here, here comes the Judge, sit down," and then sits down and doodles on a piece of paper, that Clerk of the Court will have the function of making sure that the sound recording of the evidence, and that's what will be happening, is functioning and that will make notations in a kind of a log as witnesses are called and examined and cross-examined so that any potential problem of misunde rstanding on what the tape has can be checked against the log in the event, which we expect would be the rare event, that a transcript is called for.

MR. J. McCRAE: It's just a little disturbing to see court reporter positions abolished, certainly to me, and the proposal to abolish more in the future. Last night Mr. Guy asked me how I was enjoying my new career and, Mr. Chairman, on thinking it over, I really thought that maybe court reporting is a higher calling and it's too bad to see the num bers reduced. HON. R. PENNER: We are prepared to make a deal with you. MR. J. McCRAE: No doubt, Mr. Chairman. My experience, Mr.

Chairman, with the court monitor system would be that it would be best used in places where transcripts are rarely required because I think the profes sion, as it has in the past, is going to be looking for high quality product from the court reporting profession, and so I suggest that system be used only in those courts where it's rarely expected that a transcript would be required. HON. R. PENNER: As the member may know, what we're doing is evaluating this closely, and we have staff 3143

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 from the court reporters' unit on the ev aluation commit tee. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(dX 1) to 5.(gX2), inclusive, were each read and passed. 5.(hX 1) -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: I was just int erested in the incr ease in expenditures here, where that money is going. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, I'll make sure I have the total picture here, but first of all let me give you an overview.

As the member knows, hit herto, the Great Library was run by the Law Society and we transferred funds to the Law Society, in a sense, as our share of the operation and the Law Society itself kicked in money that was assessed against the practising fees of each individual mem ber.

It seemed to us that there was a duplication of service, of staff, and that in order to have a unified libr ary service with the appropriate controls, the ability to use modern technol ogy, we ought to take all of the li brary resources, particularly one which is situated in our law court, and admin ister it centrally through the department. That was agreeable to the Law Society and they also agreed in effect to transfer to the service the money that normally would have been paid out to the Law Society. It was paid out thr ough the education grant actually . It was a component in the education grant. MR. G.

MERCIER: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: (hX 1 )-pass; (hX2)-pass. Resolution No. 20: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $16 ,4 44,600 for Attorney-General, Court Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1987- pass. 6. Protection of Indi vidual and Property Rights, Resolution No. 21; 6.(

a) Manitoba Huma n Right s Commis sion -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I note the total expenditures have been decreased from 920,000 to 884,000; and I note the comments of the Human Rights Comm ission last February in which they stated that the Attorney-General has undermined the Commission by failing to provide it with adequate staff. "We are simply not receiving the funding we need to do the job in the manner that's acceptable.

We have reached the point where it is difficult to be effective as a Commission.'' The comments of the body of rights were backed by a former Commis sion chairman, Dale Gibson, who said he grew increasingly frustrated with the Attorney General's habit of paying only lip service to human rights and, while he was anxious to incr ease the Commission's profile, he failed to provide more staff to keep up with the dramatic incr ease in complaints. "It's 'put up' or 'shut up' lime for the government," Mr. Gibson said. HON. R. PENNER: Who said that? MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Gibson. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Gibson? MR. G.

MERCIER: Mr. Gibson. HON. R. PENNER: Professor Gibson. Oh well . MR. G. MERCIER: Your old colleague. HON. R. PENNER: . he's going on sabbatical to Australia in November. MR. G. MERCIER: You haven't appointed him to anything for a little while. HON. R. PENNER: Indeed! I'm disappoi nted in that. MR. G. MERCIER: Darlene Germscheid said the Commission and its 10 investigators are suffering from burnout, staff morale has hit an all-time low, the case load has risen, it's double what it should be. She refused to say if she would resign if Penner turns down the request for more funding.

She didn't want to anticipate a negative reaction. They were requesting what they feel is a bare minimum to continue to function as we should. "We could easily use six more officers." Jn response to this article, the Attorney-General has not only not increased their funding; he's reduced it by a further $40,000.00. That's the last time they'll speak to the press . . . HON. R. PENNER: Not at all. First of all, what's the date of that article? MR. G. MERCIER: February 4, 1986. HON. R. PENNER: That's before they got the good news.

In fact, if the member looks at Page 49 of the Supplementary Information, he'll note, first of all, if I could start with that, that the staffing has been incr eased. That's the key component. Not as much as any one of us would like, but this is the second year in a row in which there has been an incr ease in staff. I am advised that the backlog in terms of dealing with complaints received has been reduced from about five months to th ree months and I hope will continue to go down.

The reduction in Other Expenditures where the actual reduction appears, not in staff, is due to two things that don't affect the work of the Commission. One is the $24,000 in grants, which is a grant to MARL, has been taken over by the Law Foundation so it's not required within the budget. And in terms of the amount that we pay to adjudicators, when an adjudication is required, we no longer require to pay out money because we are utilizing the services of Provincial Court Judges.

We have about four or five Provincial Court Judges who have volunteered to sit as adjudicators when an adjudication is necessary and, of course, they do so within th eir salary level without any extra remunerati on. Although we were usually budgeting at about 50, we were paying anywhere from 85,000 to 135, 000 a year for adjudications to outside pract itioners, and we no longer do that. MR. G. MERCIER: Does the Attorney-General not conside r, however, that when you reduce th e communications area by $1 0,000 when it was only 3144

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 $27,000 before, and you reduce the supplies and services by $50,000, that you are really weakening the education ability of the Human Rights Commission, which I think everyone agrees is probably one of its more important functions because you simply can't change peoples' attitudes overnight, that this is a long term educational process to make people aware of other peoples' rights? Have you not severely weakened the Human Rights Commission in that area? HON. R. PENNER: The 50,000 reduction in supplies and services is the reduction I referred to in terms of payment for adjudicators. MR.

G. MERCIER: Okay. HON. R. PENNER: Okay . With respect to communications, I agree. I think that we have to try to raise the amount of money that is available to the Commission for its educational work. We broke the sound barrier two years ago in terms of providing an education officer -or was it three years ago? -but we haven't yet accompanied it with a sufficient budget for its educational work. There are thr ee areas, at least, for improvement.

One would be the amount of money available for the educational work of the Commission; a second would be with respect to I think at least one more enforcement officer to reduce the backlog even further; and a third area would be to expand its outreach capability . MR. G. MERCIER: Is the Attorney-General going to introduce a new Human Rights Act at the next Session? HON. R. PENNER: That is certainly a matter that will be consi dered by our caucus when we begin to look at the legislation package for the next Session. I'll be bringing forward a proposal with respect to The Human Rights Act.

There have been a number of court decisions wl:lich have pointed out weaknesses in the act. There are various options for dealing with those weaknesses. We could amend the act. We could revise the act or we could re-enact, and caucus will consider each one of these options. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, if there are going to be substantial revisions to the act, would it not be wise to perhaps issue some sort of White Paper or Green Paper or whatever -White and Black Paper -on the proposed cha nges in order to encourage public discussion of those changes in advance? HON. R. PENNER: In fact, that was done.

The Commission, then under the leadership of Professor Dale Gibson, undertook to draft a new human rights code. They spent an enormous amount of time doing so, but one of the things the Commission did is they went out and they advertised public hearings. They went out to five, six locations, at least six locations - Winnipeg, Brandon, Steinbach, The Pas -advertised the hearings, had submissions that were made, and it was as a result of those hearings and those submissions that the code was drafted and submitted. Subs equent ly, some work has been done on it because there have been some court decisions since.

People in my own department have been looking at some of the dr afting lang uage and, as I say, a subm ission will be made to caucus. Caucus may decide that option is not closed, that it wants to go through yet a further process because it's about two years, th ree years just about, since tho se public hearings that I'm talking about. That's an option that's open. MR. CHAIRMAN: 6.(a )(1)-pass; 6.(a)(2)-pass. 6.(

b) Canada-Manitoba Legal Aid -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, there was announced last year in the summertime that there was to be an evaluation study of Legal Aid funded 80 percent by the Federal Government. Is that study completed? HON. R. PENNER: No, it's not. It's ongoing; it is active. End of September is the projected date for the report. MR. G. MERCIER: Will that report be made public? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, it will, no matter how highly it praises the government. MR. G. MERCIER: I would appreciate receiving a copy when it's made . . HON. R. PENNER: I certainly will. MR. J.

McCRAE: Are there any guidelines for the special agency of Legal Aid Manitoba? I think it's called the public inter est group; I believe it's headed by Mr. Peltz. Does that agency have any guidelines as to which cases it can take on and can't take on? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, there are both statutory parameters that are included in The Legal Aid Services Society of Manitoba Act and the board has developed guidelin es for the functioning of the department. MR. J. McCRAE: I don't see that act listed in the Minis ter's sup plementary information. Is that the Minis ter's respon sibili ty, that act? HON. R. PENNER: Yes.

MR. J. McCRAE: It is. You know, Mr. Chairman, certain ly, the people of Brandon were quite incensed at the time of our transit rate revisions. A group appeared out of nowhere in Brandon and they called themselves the Brandon Transit Consumers Association. They decided that they would fight a transit incr ease all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary, and they had the willing assistance of Legal Aid Manitoba.

The taxpayers of Brandon not only paid deficits to run our bus service there but they also paid, through their provincial taxes and federal taxes, to have the case for the Brandon Transit Consumers Association financed or taken care of by Legal Aid Manitoba and financed by them. There was no one ever found out jus t who were memb ers of this Bran don Transit Consumers Association, how many members there were, and how it is that they should qualify for free legal advice and free legal services. 3145

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 The same goes for a group, I believe, in Winn ipeg which had a complaint or a dispute. I believe the Minis ter of Culture, Heritage and Recreation may know more about this than I do, but they also availed themselves of the services of Legal Aid Manitoba. I think, also, the inmates at Stony Mountain who were unhappy that they didn't have the right to vote also took their case to Legal Aid which pursued it on their behalf. I wonder, those guidelin es, they'r e in statutory form, are they? HON. R.

PENNER: There are guidelines in the statute and there are guidelin es for group legal aid adopted by the board itself. MR. J. McCRAE: I would just ask the Minis ter if he can tell us what projects that branch of the Legal Aid Society of Manitoba undertook in the last fiscal year? HON. R. PENNER: First of all, a general comment. It's in the nature of the beast , in the nature of public interest law groups or law departments, if they happen to be departments, that their principal target is government. That's an uncomfortable but I think, in a democratic society, a necessary fact of life.

We may not always like being, in fact, the su bject of

an act ion. The most, I think, successfu l inter venent in the National Energy Board hearing on the power sale to Northern States Power was the Public Interest Law Department of Legal Aid. So here you have one branch of government, through the Attorney-General's Department, paying for and defending that group, and that group vigorously attacking one of the prime projects of the government. But that's the way it should be. There should be a group in a democratic society that is able to represent public int erests that are not otherwise represented.

I'm not able to comment on what is alleged to be some shadow group in Brandon. I wasn't under the impression that it was, but I'll leave that for another forum. Certain ly, the Public Int erest Department, when it app eared before the National Ener gy Board , represented a consumers' association and did so very well. But it has lived within a relatively small budget. It appears before the Public Utilit ies Board. It's raised questions that, again, would be adverse to the int erests of the Man itoba Telephone System and, on appeal, to Hydro. I think we need such groups.

Every level of government in Canada -not every Pr ovincial Go ver nment but most Provi ncial Governments, certainly the Federal Government - recognize that and offer some level of funding to the public interst groups. That's the general comment. Now, the specific question -in fact, I've really dealt with a couple of the projects. I'm referring to the most recent report, the one for the fiscal year ending March 31, 19 85. On Page 6: "The department continued to carry a wide mix of cases on behalf of consumers.

A numb er of major interventions were conducted before both the Public Utilities Board and the National Energy Board involving natural gas rates, telephone service and hydro-electric power. A test case in the Manitoba Court of Appeal established that the Public Utiliti es Board must consider the quality of customer service when setting new utility rates. Environmental groups were represented in matters involving nuclear waste storage and the preservation of Omand's Creek in Winnipeg. The department assisted groups involved in a variety of neighbourhood and housing issues.

Parent comm ittees in two rural Native communities were represented in matters involving the quality of education. A variety of organizations of the disabled were assisted. A constitutional challenge was taken to certain restrictive provi sions of The Unemp loyment Insu rance Act. Prisoners and inm ate organizations were represented at an inq uest in negotiations for a new provincial discipline grievance system and in court cases concerning prison conditions and right to counsel. In all, the department opened approximately 75 new files. I think that's the most recent information that I have.

The case you're referring to, actually, is about a year-and-a-half old, the Brandon Transit case. MR. J. McRAE: Mr. Chairman, that case was the one that involv ed the quality of service offered. That was the Brandon Transit consumers' case.

Maybe it did break some new legal ground, I'm not qualified to say, but apparently the City of Brandon is entitled to stop transit service altogether without running away to the Public Utiliti es Board for permission, but if it wants to raise its fees, it must, and then it faces Arne Peltz and the Brandon Transit Consumers Association, a very frustrating time for the council of the City of Brandon and certainly for the taxpayers of the City of Brandon. I'm going to have to have a look at the statute just to see what the criteria are, Mr. Chairman. HON. R.

PENNER: I'm sorry, was there a question there or jut a comment? MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I don't think so. MR. CHAIRMAN: Items 6.(b)(1) to 6.(c)(2) were each read and passed . (

d) Land Titles Office -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, could the Attorney General confirm the statement by Mr. Evans, whose statements, I'm sure, would always be accurate, that the Winnip eg Land Titles Office this year will yield more than $14 mi lli on in revenue for the Provincial Government? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, the projected revenue for the whole year is $14 million. MR. G. MERCIER: Is that based on the increase in fees that was annou nced in the Budget; does it include that? HON. R. PENNER: Yes. MR. G. MERCIER: When will that increase come into effect? HON. R. PENNER: September 1st. MR. G. MERCER: That hasn't been publicly announced yet, I don't believe? 3148

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 HON. R. PENNER: No, it hasn't. The regulation was just before Cabinet last Wednesday. MR. G. MERCIER: Does the Attorney-General have a copy, then, of the new tariff or fees ? HON. R.

PENNER: Let me, before answering that, or as part of the answer, ind icate, because it was cleared by Cabinet last week and by Treasury Board this morning, that on the positive side we're adding 10 SY's, effective immed iately, to the Land Titles; and we're allocating in this fiscal year an additional $1 00,000 and, in the next fiscal year, an additional $200,000 to the automation in order to speed up the automation.

So that with a combination of the increased SY's, increased automation, and some emergency steps which are being taken, which I can respond to a bit later, we've already begun to bring down the dela y considerably and we hope to bring it down even further . The fee incr ease is just to two items, the two biggest items -transfer and mortgage -and is simply a $10 incr ease to the base in each one of these so that the base fee from which one starts with respect to a transfer is 16 on a mortgage and 17 on a tran sfer. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, the statement of revenues that was tabled, the detailed estimates of revenues that we received, indicated that the Land Titles Office this year would receive in fees $1 1. 5 million. The estimate of revenue is now up to $14 million. The total expenditures of the Land Titles Office prior to what has just been annou nced by the Attorney-General are some $4.477 million. You'v e added another $10 0,000,000, so it's 4.5 million, 4.6 million. There's about a $10 million ... HON. R. PENNER: And then the 10 SY's. Did you . MR. G. MERCIER: Yes.

There's about a $10 million profit that the province is earning out of the Land Titles Office. Certain ly, I think that there's probably been a tradition of the province or the revenue from the Land Titles Office exceeding the expenditur es by $1 million or $2 million. What we now have is a situation where it's a $10 million profit. The people who are utilizing the Land Titles Office's services are, through no fault of the people in the Land Titles Office, I would like to make it clear because the people who are there are doing the best job they can with the resources available to them.

But surely, it was known to the Attorney General by the trends last winter that it was going to be a real banner year at the Land Titles Office with the int erest rates dropping and the filings as of then. I have a numb er of questions. How can the Provincial Government justify taxing the users of the Land Titles Office to the extent that the province gains a net revenue of $10 million over and above the expenditures for operations? Why did the Attorney-General not do something last winter when it was clear that there was going to be a great deal of activity at the Land Titles Office?

Why has he allowed the situation to become as bad as it is now where the waiting time is as long as it is, where it's going to the extent apparently , at least from the news article, that the Land Titles Office isn't dealing with the mortgage forecl osure applications? That looks fine on the surface to people but, when that happens, there's a cost to the lenders. That cost to the lenders will be passed on to everybody who deals with the lenders. So at first glance, that was probably my own reaction when I first read the headline.

Well, that's fine, if they'r e not going to deal with foreclosures, but there's a cost to the public from this. It would appear to me that the latest incr ease in fees is totally unne cessary when the Land Titles Office will net $3.5 million more than was -of course, if that includes the estimate, so that would make it $2. 7 million more than was predicted in the statement of revenues from the Finance Minister . The incr ease in fees, it seems to me, therefore is not necessa ry.

The increase in fees that this government brought into effect a couple of years ago, two or two-and-a half years ago, has imposed a pretty heavy expense on, for example, a young couple buying their first home, $50,000 or $60,000, with a mortgage of $45,0 00 or $50,000.00. They have a very high expense there. It seems to be un necessary in view of the amount of revenue that the government is taxing the users of the Land Titles. Again, I'm not blaming anyone in the Land Titles Office.

They're doing the best job they can, but I think the government itself has to take some responsibility for a situation where - a number of years ago, if the waiting time was 10 days, that was the maximum time. Now, it's five, six, seven weeks. Perhaps, the Attorney-General can find out actually what day the Land Titles Office are signing today to indicate the extent of the delay. HON. R. PENNER: The member raises a number of questions, one of which is why didn't we do something last winter. In fact, in November of last year, we added five term SY's to . MR. G. MERCIER: Those were the ones you had cut before. HON.

R. PENNER: No. There was some reduction in staff overall, due to automa tion, but we added specifically five term SY's as it began to be clear that we were about to fall behind. One makes the best guess that one can and, at the time, it seemed that the five SY's would be sufficient. But in fact, the incr ease in business exceeded even the best estimates of the wild enthusiasts. Other steps were taken. There was $90,000 worth of overtime used last year. The estimate was wrong, because the amount of business being transacted in the Winnip eg Land Titles Office, as I say, exceeded estimates. We did fall behind.

We began using overtime in the spring. I subsequently put together a proposal to deal with the problem and I'm happy to report that, although a bit later than I would have liked, tha t proposal has been accepted, and we have the 10 additional SY's and a number of other steps have been taken. It indicates some improvement as follows. Comparing July 21, which is about where we were at our worst to where we are presently with respect to the update, we were six days behind on July 21. We're one day behind now. With respect to examining, we were 20 days behind on July 21. We're eight days behind now. With respect 3147

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 to the engrossing of transfers, we're still behind about the same number of day. We're performing some alternative functions there. We've picked up a week on mortgages. We were 21 days behind on July 21, 14 now. With respect to other functions, there has been a little improvement. We're now bringing in the additional SY's but, because those SY's have to be trained, we're bringing in people from the rural offices and putting them on the front desk, as it were, until we can train the new staff.

Beginning tomorrow, as an interim measure, in order to speed up the ability of people to complete their transactions and get the bank financing and the rest of it, the LTO, as a temporary measure, will stop issuing new certificates of title in the majority of registration of transfers of land. They will stamp the transfer on the ven dor's title to show title and name of the purch aser but the actual title will not issue. It will come out subsequently . This will substantially impr ove tu rnarou nd time of is suing tit les and finalizing registrations of transfers and mortgages.

Then we can begin actually with this new proposal. Transfers will have to be microfilmed on a daily basis. Now, with respect to the fees , at the moment it's an estimate. I hope that estimate is right but it might be somewhat short of the 14 million. I think it would be more than the 11. 5 million shown in the figure tabled in the budget. I hope so, but it might conceivably be less than the 14 million, it might conceivably be more. But we are dealing in that sense with an estimate. It is clear, however, that whether it's 11. 5 or 14, one can speak of the Land Titles Office, in a sense, making a profit.

I don't find, quite frank ly, anything wrong in principle with the various functions of government where it can do so without undue hardship to the users of the service, in fact, making more than cost. The thing with the normal, the average person who deals in property, I think it's estimated that most of those who are involved in residential homes will go through about 2.5 transactions in the course of a lifetime, somewhere between 2 and 3. I don't know if we have an update figure. Let's say it's 3. I went with 4 so I'm trying to pick a medium figure. Jim, how many have you gone through in your lifetime?

You're younger than I am. - (Interject ion) - You have, well, some people are more gypsy than others. But even if it's 4, which I think would be a high num ber, people are rather more settled than the Attorney-General and the Member for Brandon West. The total registration cost is going to be a matter of a few hundr ed dollars. That's not a small sum of money but it's twice or three times in a lifetime.

It's not as if it's like a park fee that you're using several times during the summer every summe r, or automobile registration which is a cost year-in and year-out, a couple of times, two or three times during a lifetime. So I think that if in fact operations of government are in some instances to make something of a profit - I don't hesitate to use the term -that this is an area where it's not inappr opriate that it should do so.

We all, I think, share in common the feeling that the deficit should be reduced and where it can be reduced without imposing a hardship on individuals - and I don't think fees of that kind, twice or thr ee times in a lifetime are a hardship -then regretably we have to look at it. Presumably in the ideal world, governments 3148 provide these services free of charge or, in a sense, jus t take it out of general revenue. MR. G. MERCIER: What is the status of the computer program? HON. R. PENNER: In terms of the computer program, we're at about year two of a five-year program.

First of all, we com pleted the overall management study. It was by Thorne Stevenson and Kellogg. That was an excellent study that provided the basis upon which to proceed. The first operation which was computerized was the general register. It's been in operation since March of'85. The Certificate of Title system which is very, very key, we're looking at planned imple mentation, Winn ipeg only , June '87 and we expect to have the rest of the system completed in Winnipeg by fall of '89 and the expansion of the system to the rural offices, summer of 1990. MR. G.

MERCIER: What is the cost of operating the Brandon Land Titles Office this year compared to last year? HON. R. PENNER: No incr ease in cost is the answer I'm given. MR. G. MERCIER: No increase in cost? Does the Attorney-General have any plans to close the Neepawa Land Titles Office . . . HON. R. PENNER: There are no closures planned for this year and I say that deli berately because I don't want to make it seem that we'r e pre cluding the possibility of further closures.

I think that as we develop computerization, we'll have to take a look at the operation of all out-of-Winnip eg offices and it may well be the case that some further closures have to be considered. MR. G. MERCIER: I spoke to the Attorney-General last week about Bill 54 with respect to the Enderton caveat . Is the Attorney-General prepared to support the passage of that bill? HON. R. PENNER: Not in this Session of the legislature.

I think I'm going to have to hold on that until I've had a chance -I'd hoped I would have had a chance by now to check with the City of Winnip eg in terms of two sign ificant changes it's made in its zoning by-law for R 1 in this year and generally how it would regard the restoration of the old V.R. caveats because we couldn't -and I did mention this to the Member for St. Norbert -confine it to the Enderton caveat . We'd have to look at the caveat in the gates and oh, I think there are at least half-a-dozen others. MR. J. McCRAE: Mr.

Chairman, the Minis ter said that . . . it was the second year of a five-year program respecting land tit les offices and that his computerization program would be expanded into the rural areas in or around 1990. Do I have that correct so far? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, you do.

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 MR. J. McCRAE: What kinds of changes does the Minis ter foresee in areas like Brandon respecting the services provided and the staff at the Land Titles Office there? HON. R. PENNER: What we hope to be able to do in the state-of-the-art technology -I've long awaited an opportunity to use that phrase -is in fact to have the system accessed from storefron1 modules in Virden and in smaller locations so that some of the problems that small town practitioners now have will be met for most of the work that they have to do.

They won't have to either mail in or phone in or go to Brandon or wherever. They'll be able to deal with the Land Titles system which through, as I say, modules strategically placed, and the various parts of the system will be acces sing each other. MR. J. McCRAE: Would it be safe to say, Mr. Chairman, that these services in the Western Manitoba region would remain headqu artered in Brandon? HON. R. PENNER: I would think so, yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: 6.( d)(1)-pass; 6.(d)(2)-pass. 6.(e)( 1) Personal Property Security Registry -pass; 6.(e)(2)-pass. 6.(

f) Canada-Manitoba Cr imin al Inj uries Compensation Board -the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I simply ask the Attorney-General - I don't think there's any real change in the operation here that he would bring to the attention of the commit tee? HON. R. PENNER: That is right, but I should mention, and I may have mentioned it before - I think I have - is that there are active negotiations taking place with the Federal Government to incr ease the amount of the federal contribution.

We are reasonably optimistic that the federal contribution will incr ease -it's now less than 10 percent of the total cost -to about 30 percent, and that would be most welcome. We'll report to the House when that happens. MR. CHAIRMAN: 6.(f)- pass. Resolution No. 21: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $16 ,371 ,700, for Protection of Indi vidual and Pr operty Righ ts, Department of the Attorney-General, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 19 87-pass. If staff would now absent thems elves, we will deal with Item 1. (a), the Min ister's Sal ary. HON. R.

PENNER: We usually deal with the Liquor Commission under Sal ary, so could I ask the Liquor staff to stay? MR. CHAIRMAN: I assume the critic has questions on the Liquor Control Commission? Okay, if staff would come forward, please. The Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: I have a copy, just received myself, in fact, for the Member for St. Norbert, of a draft of the 63rd Report. Sorry, that's gone to the printer's but it's not out yet. I think that the chief executive officer, where it's necessary, will direct us to any sign ificant changes between the 62nd Report and the 63rd Report.

So if the member would prefer to deal with the 62nd Report, we can do that, and if there's any . . . MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I wonder - well, let me ask the Attorney-General a question with respect to a matter we dealt with in comm ittee yesterday, which dealt with the alcohol level and particularly that of Sarasoda. I would be quite content to see that sold as it is sold now, providing it is sold to persons 18 years of age and over.

Is there any possibility of the Attorney-General considering amendments which would allow the sale of products like that, that might have an alcoholic content, say, of between . . . HON. R. PENNER: .5 and 1. MR. G. MERCIER: . . .. 5 and whatever the upper limit was before, to allow them to be sold provided that they are sold to people who are 18 years of age or over? HON. R. PENNER: That probably raises more of a problem than the problem created by trying to establish an appropriate control level. I think what I'd like to emphasize, and I'm sure the Member for St.

Norbert will join me in this, is that the proposed change is not in force and will not come into force until proclaimed. In the in terim, a nu mb er of matters are to be ascert ained. It was reported to me, and one should be mindful of the dangers of hearsay, that a representative of a supermarket was heard to state on the radio this morning that this means they would have to stop selling shaving cream. Well, I've yet to find a shaving cream which really makes it as a beverage. But then, again, I may have peculiar tastes.

I remember as an 18 -year-old in the army first encountering somebody who had a taste for shoe polish and I thought I had entered a new world at the time. It turned out to be a very old world, indeed. That person was last seen on a train from Petawawa to Montr eal eating a rose. He never did make it overseas. Nor do I think that if we were, in fact, to end up going down to .5, it would affect a whole range of products which are on the shelves for cooking purposes and so on. But one has to be sure of that.

I've intima ted to Labatt's, the parent company of Holiday Juice, and to Supervalu that we will hear their represe ntations and I'll be meeting with them over a period of time and I'll consult with my friend, the Member for St. Norbert, to see what data we have that might affect the way in which we'll want to go. In the meantime, it may be that if there's sufficient evidence that there's a problem at the .5, that we want to consider further , that the change will not be proclaimed until we come back in a few months' time and have a chance to debate the matter more ful ly.

I'm saying that - I hope the press picks it up -because I was advised today that Sarasoda, which was previously available downstairs, has been locked up by the 3149

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 downstair s restaurant. I think that 's not perh aps the most egregious loss to mankind that one can imagine . I had never tasted Sarasoda and I went to the stor e where I normally shop on Saturday and bought one bottle of Sarasoda and shared it between my wife, myself, my three-year-old and the seven-month-old. The only one who really liked it was the seven-month old . No, we didn't do that.

Seriously, I think we were right in responding to the concerns expressed by the Manitoba Medical Association , the Manitoba branch of the Canadian Addiction Foundation, and that, in a sense , we 've put matters on hold. MR. G. MERCIER: Is the Attorney-General prepared to perhaps consider , during this period of time , amendments that might allow the sale of these various beverages that contain limited amounts of alcohol in the present stores in which they are sold, provided that they're sold to persons 18 years of age or over? HON. R. PENNER: Actually , appending the proclamation of that

section , the effect of not proclaiming is that beverages containing as much as 1.4 by volume can be sold in the stores , not just Sarasoda, which is .9, but Sarasoda-plus could be sold; but that won 't be for a matter of a few months. I think that certainly the 1.0 is right and it may be that the .5 is right as well , but we'll take a good look at it. It's argued by Holiday Juice that the technology doesn't exist to bring it down from .9 percent to .5 percent in Sarasoda. That surprises me a bit, but I certainly would at least want to discuss that with those people . MR. G. MERCIER : Mr.

Chairman, has the Attorney General given any consideration to the submissions made by the Manitoba Restaurant and Food Services Association? As I understand it, they've made proposals for a number of cha nges involving licensing, etc. , and they also have recommended a change in allowing licensed restaurants to serve alcohol on Good Friday . HON. R. PENNER: As is now apparent , there are no proposals in the amending act that has already been dealt with at committee and go to Report Stage to do that.

I have received and would have like to have proceeded with a proposal from the Commission to reduce the present 26 classes of licences to about 12, a more manageable 12. I think it can be reasonably expected that proposal will come forward at the next Session of the Legislature . At that time , we will tackle in one way or another proposals with respect to the availability of at least bee r and wine in restaurants on Good Friday.

I doubt whether the public would feel that we have offended the spirit of Good Friday in doing that , but I think we want to make sure that people have a chance at least to let their feelings be known on that. The Member for Kildonan says , it's okay by him . It's okay by me too, but laws are made for the population at large , some of whom should not be at large . MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman , the officials from the Liquor Commission have, in the past , presented us with some compar ativ e s tatistics on prices of products in Manitob a versu s o ther jurisdi ctions . I wond er if th at 's availabl e. HON. R.

PENNER: I think there has been a little bit of improv ement in our comparative position. I recall specifically , because it's a brand I used to drink before I became virtually teetotal, that Ballantyne 's scotch, which was the scotch we used as an example, was at the top of the list in the last material circulated. We're now down to second-highest. It's still high, but we tend to be, as the memb er can see, a little bit on the high end of the spectrum . MR. G. MERCIER: Can the Minister e xplain the rationale for six beer price increa ses in 15 months? HON. R.

PENNER: There are a number of factors and, if I don 't get them all , the Chief Executive Officer will help me out. There has been intense competition , first of all, between the three principal brewer s for, on the whole, a declining market. So, the fight for market share has intensified . One of the results of that has been , in a sense , a packaging war. I mean , to a lot of people , unsophisticated in this area such as myself , beer is beer is beer. I can just as easily switch from Maison 's to Labatt's to Carling 's. It really doesn 't make that much differenc e.

But when somebody comes with a screw top , well , why not? After you've torn your skin off for the third or fourth time , you figure it's not such a deal. Then somebody comes out with a screw top that really works, so you try th at. Then they go to tall bottles which, depending on the design of your fridge, takes up more or less space . So this has added somewhat to cost because the interchangeability of bottles is no longer possible, and have had to invest significant amount of money , the breweries, in the sorting of now incompatible, in a sense, bottle types and sizes . There have been wage increases.

Ther e have been general increases in other costs . Another factor that should be noted is that the return to the breweries in Manitoba per dozen or half-dozen , whatever unit you wanted to use , was about the lowest in Canada and it was felt that in some of the price adjustments which were really passed through . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me. Could we have some order, please , so the member can hear the Attorney General's response ? HON. R. PENNER: We're discussing beer, which is big in Thompson .

So that was another factor and that, essentially , accounts for the price increases to which the member refers. MR. G. MERCIER: Is the Attorney-General satisfied with the process now? Previously of course beer price increases were subject to approval by the Public Utilities Board. Is he satisfied with the negotiations and discussions that take place prior to settling on an increase? 3150

Tuesday , 19 August, 1986 HON. A. PENNER: Yes, I am. I think tha t the Commission is very mindful of its duty to the public. And the fact that until July 1st of this year, the return to the breweries per unit was lower in Manitoba than just about in any other province, shows that the Comm ission wasn't -once the PUB process removed wasn't just bending to the requests of the breweries; and I feel very satisfied that the Commission has responded both to the needs of the breweries and to the public. MA. G.

MERCIER: The estima tes of revenue indicate that the government is looking toward increasing the revenue from $141 million to $14 5 million in this fiscal year. It would appear from the draft report tha t the Commission didn't make 141 -or at least 141 million was not transferred in the last fiscal year -that it was only about a million and a half below 139.4. HON. A. PENNER: Yes, that's right. We were slightly off. MA. G. MERCIER: Is the Attorney-General satisfied that the revenues will be up that much? HON. A. PENNER: The indications are that we may not meet that target.

We're presently running a point or so below target, at this stage. MA. G. MERCIER: Are there any new stores to be opened, either in Winn ipeg or any other major centre in this province? HON. A. PENNER: Yes, revamped stores, Brandon for example, the cont ract has been let for a completely renovated store. It's in the same premise but we were able to obtain, I think, a 10 -year renewal of the lease. But it's going to be a comp letely redone store in Brandon, and the first Fine Wines Boutique outside of the city will be opened in that store in Brandon. Where else have we got -Kill arney, Winn ipegosis. MA. G.

MERCIER: Is the Commi ssion looking at moving the Fort Garry store further south? HON. A. PENNER: No, that's not being contemplated. MA. G. MERCIER: Would they look at it? The population is growing considerably in south Fort Garry, there are a lot of commercial developments in that area, and I get a numb er of complaints that it's very inconvenient for people in the south end to get to the existing store. HON. A. PENNER: We've got a lease on that store till 1990, but the Commi ssion does updated market studies on a yearly basis.

So certainly as that lease comes toward its conclusion and we begin to think either to renegoti ate or move or perhaps open an additional store, the market studies will be done and if, as the member suggests, a significant shift in the marke t area to the south has taken place which might warrant on the parameters we use either a shift of the store or a new store, that would certainly be put in the works. MA. G. MERCIER: I would appreciate it if in 1987-88 the Commis sion could take a look at it from that perspective. MA. CHAIRMAN: The Attorney-General, affirmative. The Member for St. Norbert. MA. G.

MERCIER: Could the Attorney-General indicate through the Comm ission the arrangements that have been made for the testing of wine? I recall last year there were all sorts of concerns about content of wines. There was a press release issued by the Attorney General last November about an agreement with the Manitoba Research Council. Are they testing I guess particularly wines? Perhaps the Minis ter could indicate what they exactly are tes ting. Is it being done in Manitoba? HON. A. PENNER: Everyt hing that can be tested is being tested and is being tested in Manitoba.

There may, in some instances, be in a particular kind of product a hiatus in terms of the availability of the appropriate testing equipment. In such circu mstances, we would look to other Commissions, Alberta or Ontario, to assist or to see the results of testing that they might have done on the product. MR. G. MERCIER: I assume there's commu nication with other provincial commissions so that there's not un necessary dupl ication of testing taking place. HON. R. PENNER: Yes.

For example, I noticed on June 11 we had a confirmation that a certain Armagnac VSOP met ethyl carbamate specifications and that it had been certified by the Alb erta Lab. We were satisfied that the product could be released for sale on the basis of tha t certification. MR. G. MERCIER: Have all of the South African products been sold? HON. A. PENNER: About 70 percent has been sold, I'm advised. MA. G. MERCIER: Can the Attorney-General indicate how the grant that he has annou nced will be paid? Will that be paid from the Commission, or is that on Treasury Board approval? HON. R.

PENNER: It will not be paid from the Commission. The Commission will remit in the normal way but will ident ify what portion of its reg ula r remittance is to consolidate it, our net profit on the sale of South African products. Once that has been identified and we are satisfied that a num ber of the legal requirements such as the incorporation of the organization and its establishment of an appropriate auditing kind of function has been set up and that it makes an application.

It must, like any other organization, make an application, and the application must identify the specific purposes of the grant and any other sources of funding. Then on that basis a grant will be made on an annual basis, but it must go through the regular Treasury Board Cabinet process, as the member may recal l. It's not only Treasury Board that grants an application, but it mus t be by O/C as well. MR. G. MERCIER: I note in a press report that the Ontario Liquor Licensing Board is carrying on public 3151

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 hearings with respect to the Province of Ontario's liquor laws, and that one of the major items apparently that has come to the attention of the Board is that the people of Ontario appear to want the drinking age raised to 21 from 19. I assume that this would be the case that the Commi ssion will be obtaining the final results. I assume it will be a fairly public document from the Ontario Liquor Licensing Board. I wonder, when that is done, if that perhaps could be made available to myself. HON. R. PENNER: Yes. MR. G. MERCIER: No further questions. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, gentlemen.

We're on Minister's Sala ry. MR. G. MERCIER: Pass. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (a)-pass. Resolution 16: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,950, 100 for the Department of the Attorney-General, Admini stration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1987- pass. Thank you all. Comm ittee rise. SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Santos: Commit tee of Supply , please come to order. We have been considering the Estimates of the Department of Natural Resources. We are now on Item No. 8.(a)( 1) Fisheries, Admi nistration: Salaries; 8.(a)

(2) Other Expenditures -the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The question I want to raise with the Minister is, he indicated that there'd been spending quotas or permits for the Fisheries

section in Lake Manitoba. I think he indicated that there was an additional 20 permits issued; and iro ni cally , Mr. Cha ir man , last year we were discussing the quota system and I bel ieve there's a policy in place right now where fishermen can sell their quota along with their assets which I raised at a previous occas ion, where ironically the Min ister of Agriculture has indicated there is no sale of Class 2 quotas -the transfer of them -which is basically selling the cows and quota. And ironically we have within this department a policy which allows this, and I'm not objecting to it, Mr.

Chairman, because I support that principle of selling quota rights. Because, Mr. Chairman, and I think the reason why the then Minister, the Member for Lac du Bonnet, instigated the policy of allowing to sell fish quotas - I think there's some criteria that controls it to some deg ree -which allowed the comme rc ial fisherman who had quota, had equipment, boats, nets, etc., etc., that if he wanted to get out of the busine ss that he could sell it to somebody. I believe -and the Min ister can correct if I'm wrong but I think I read it right -ther e was a provision made now that it's allowed to happen.

I have raised this before 315 2 where, in the dairy indus try, for example, the Minister of Agriculture is moving in a totally different direction where there used to be provision for the sale of cows and quota, at one time, was stopped. We have a controversy in terms of philo sophy within this government and I would prefer not to see it change. I'm not objecting to the fact that quotas can be sold along with the equipment within the Department of Natural Resources for fish quotas.

What I object to is the fact that the Minister of Agriculture decided to go on a different route and said no more of that, because you 're capital izing on something that is not your right. Government gives the quotas and you should not be able to sell that, but we allow quotas to be sold in the department of commercial fishing. You know, it's sort of a controversy and I have difficulty with that, the incons istency, but that is jus t how this government operates from time to time.

I want to ask this Minis ter, he keeps allocating, he ind icated that he allocated 20 more permits, fishing permits or quotas on Lake Man itoba, and by matter of application, he says, but we will stop that shortly because we think we reached the maximum. At the same time they improvise the sale of quotas in that system and now say, well, you can sell that, you know, and they'v e given approximately 20 permits in the last four years. Those individuals can turn around and now sell that and make a profit on something that the government has given them, which is contrary to what has happened in the dairy industr y.

I wonder if the Minis ter could try and explain the rationale for that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Min ister . HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure where the Member for Emerson gets the figure of 20 additional licences. I indicated that certainly on Lake Manitoba there was an incr ease over the last four years in the number of licences but I am not sure that the Member for Emerson -in the number of 20, was he referring to Lake Manitoba or to Lake Winnip eg? That would help me. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: I'll try and clarify that because the Min ister indicated to me that there were extra permits or quotas issued, whether it's Lake Manitoba or across the province, because it is my understanding that anybody that has a quota, a fishing quota, whether it's spring, summer, wint er, whatever the case may be, tha t they are now allowed to sell it. Well, the Min ister shakes his head. Then I want a clarification on that. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to clarify that for the Member for Emerson. That provision exists for quotas on Lake Winnip eg only. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Wel l, Mr.

Chairman, can the Min ister explain why Lake Winnipeg -did he say Lake Winn ipeg or Lake Manitoba? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Lake Winnipeg. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Lake Winnipeg. Why would the quota holders on Lake Winnipeg be allowed to sell their

Tuesday , 19 August, 1986 qu ota and th eir equipm ent and the rest of the commercial fishermen not be allo wed to do that? Mr. Chairman, I ask you. Certainly , you must have some concern. Why would one certain lake be allo wed to do that and the other one would not? Maybe, Mr. Chairman, the people on Lake Winnip egosis should be allo wed to sell their quota, which is worth nothing because it's been closed down. I just wonder if the Minis ter can maybe clarify exactly the objective in what they are trying to accom plish with this thing. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Chairman, I think it's important to know that ther e are different types of quotas. On some lakes there are individual quot as for fishermen. In other cases, there are lake quotas. So the quota is allocated to the lake, not to the individual fisherman. In the case of Lake Winnipeg, there were individual quotas that the fishermen held and the request came from the fishermen to provide the opportunity to sell those and that was in that case granted.

In other lakes, the quota -and I believe it's true for Lake Manitoba -that in the case of Lake Manitoba the quota, as such, is assigned to the lake and the individual fishermen who hold a licence really produce as much as they want. They don't have an individual quota but they produce on an individual basis until the lake quota has been filled. So there is really a variation in value.

I should point out to the Member for Emerson that in part of their presentation to me the other day, the representative from the Lake Manitoba Fishermen's Association asked for some consideration of the right to sell the lake access. Although they don't have a quota, they do have access to the lake and they have asked for consideration of whether there might be sale of access to the lake. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I can appreciate that and I have no difficulty with it, but the Minister just ind icated th at there were approximately 20 additional permits issued for Lake Manitoba -am I correct? -more or less.

The government has chosen in their wisdom to allocate an additional 20 permits or allocations for Lake Manitoba. Now the same people are turning around and asking whether they have the right to maybe have the same privilege, which I think they should be entitled to, as the people on Lake Winnipeg who now have a chance and are allo wed to sell their quota and their equipment like I compare it all the time, Mr. Chairman, to the dairy operations. Basical ly, what I'm saying, Mr.

Chairman, is there is no consistent policy somewhere along the line and I would hope that somewhere along the line we can develop a policy that's going to be acceptable to all commercial fishermen, because how can we say that the quota holders on Lake Winnipeg are allo wed to now sell their equipment and their quota, given to them by the government, by this department, and as I illus trated before, where dairy people, who have that same kind of privilege, are not allo wed to do that any more. They cannot sell their cows with quota unl ess they sell the whole operation. There's a conflict here.

Now this Minis ter or this department has allo wed an extra 20 permits on Lake Manitoba and that same group has now applied, rightfully so, to ask whether they can have the same privilege as the fishermen on Lake Winn ipeg have. What I'm asking this Mini ster is where is the consistency; where do we finally establish a sort of a general policy across this province in terms where commercial fishermen know where they're at? I'd like to ask this Minis ter to explain the situation, exactly what's happen ing, what his position is.

What is the direction that he's going in terms of allowing the transfer of quotas or permits, whether it's Lake Manitoba or Lake Winnipeg? Where are we at? Mr. Chairman, I just want to reiterate. We have Lake Winni pegosis, which has been closed to commercial fishing for th ree years now. and they have a quota as well, supposed ly, or permits. If they sell theirs, there's no value on there, because they can't fish.

I'm just wondering ii we can establish if the Minis ter of Natural Resources has some kind of plan that will be sort of un iversal because I don't think I find it accep table, or anybody will, to say, well, on this lake we allow the transfer of quota, sale of assets, the next one we don't; we issue extra permits and we're going to control the permits and the one lake we close off. There's got to be some universality in this whole thing. I wonder if the Minister could maybe clarify where his department is basically trying to go with this thing. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Chairman, I want to ind icate to the Member for Emerson that on each of the lakes there is a fishermen's association which has a great deal of input in terms of the management of the lake. We are working cooperatively with those associations and there is variation in the opinion. Not all fishermen are of the opinion, for example, that the quota should be transferred just by sale, that there should be some alloca tion. So certainly we will heed the advice of the fishermen; we will be in consultation with the fishermen as we have demons trated already . And with that

part icular approach, I think we can well address the needs of the fishermen, and I don't think at all that there is a concern on the part of the fishermen that there is inconsi stency, as suggested by the Mem ber for Emerson. I think it demons trates simply a willin gness on our part to look at the development of a policy that is sensitive to the needs of the fishermen on each of the lakes. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, could I then assume, in view of what the Minister's comments are, that we'll deal with each particular lake and each association separately based on their desires?

That in the case of Lake Winnipeg, we have allowed the transfer of quotas; in Lake Manitoba, we issue extra permits at this stage of the game, but they are already asking for the consideration to be able to transfer th ose things. Lake Winn ipegosis, it means nothing. Each ind ividual group is going to be dealt with on a separate basis.

I want to just caution the Minister, if that is the direction that he's going in, he's going to have major difficult y, because once a precedent is set, as it has been set on Lake Winnipeg, how do you deny the permit holders on Lake Manitoba the same right as they have on Lake Winnipeg, or Lake Winnip egosis? In this

part icular case, Lake Winnip egosis would be a 3153

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 meaning less thing, but there are many commercial fishermen and various other lakes other than Lake Manitoba and Lake Winnipegosis. Are we going to treat each separate group based on their desires and try and accommodate them? Or are we going to try and establish a general policy which will be accepted, that will do all commercial fishermen in the province? I'm asking; tell me. Mr. Chairman, is it a knee-jerk reaction when they come at you and you're going to respond? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Chairman, I want to indicate as well to the member that it is not a knee-jerk reaction, but on the other hand we are not going to suggest that we or the fishermen have so little imagination or flexi bility that there can only be one model throughout the whole province for the management of this particular resource. Surely there is room to take into account the interests of the fishermen, the variations in the lake, and put in place that kind of a model which best serves the interests of the fishermen.

I don't think that fishermen would agree with the Member for Emerson, where they would say that every lake must be dealt with in the same model. MR. A. DRIEDGER: I think, Mr. Chairman, that the Min ister is using a sort of bandaid approach. He says we're not using a kne e-jerk reaction which I think he is , because how can you differentiate? If you have a comm ercial fishing licence or quota, how can you start differentiating? This Min ister is in a quan dary if he's not going to esta blish some kind of universal ity, because now he's going to differentiate.

He's caught in a bind -I hate to keep kicking at this Minister. - (Interjecti on) - Seriously, because I have difficulty with that because these problems are not of his own making, but the Minis ter is faced with the resolution to resolve some of these problems and I don't know how he's going to do that, because he allo ws the commercial fishermen on Lake Winnip eg now to sell and transfer quota, and Lake Manitoba he keeps issuing licences like crazy and he says, "We'll have to stop that pretty soon." The same people that he's issued lic ences to in the last four years, not him but his department, now say we want the same privileges as the people on Lake Winnipeg have, which is understandable.

I would find that acceptable. If the people on Lake Winnip eg can transfer quota, with assets, I would want the same thing if it was on Lake Manitoba. He keeps on issuing licences or permits for Lake Manitoba. Already it just ill ustrates the tip of the iceberg of the problems, and unless there's going to be some positive direction in terms of all commercial fishermen, I can't see where this Minis ter can come out being a winner on this thing. Mr.

Chairman, if I were a commercial fisherman who had received my permit in the last year or two, I would push at this Minister to say, "I want the same privilege on Lake Manitoba as the people on Lake Winnipeg." Mr. Chairman, I'm trying to ill ustrate some of the difficulties in terms of dealing with this thing and I'm hoping that his advisors and his staff can maybe come up with some plan.

I'm not a commercial fisherman; I'm illus trating to this Minis ter some of the shortcomings and fallacie s in the system and I'm hoping th at 3154 somewhere along the line, in conjunction with the people, because the fishermen are very much like farmers -it's hard to get them organized, to come on a common ground, because each one has an individual perspective on this thing. That is why they look to government, because gov ernment issues the permits; government is responsible and they look to government for leadership in this respect.

I'm asking the Minis ter, is there a direction that you are going in your department in terms of dealing with these kind of problems? In view of the answers I've had so far, I don't think there is. I jus t want to warn the Min ister that unle ss he chooses, in the next period, until the next time when we meet, to deal with these kind of situations, unless there's a direction that's going to be established, this Min ister is going to have major problems. I would hope that the Minis ter can indicate to us tod ay, what is his perspective?

Certainly he has his advisors in there and I don't want to be critical of them because it's a dilemma. There's a major dilemma, but somewhere along the line there has to be leadership coming and I wonder if there's any plan or policy in place that will establish how these things will be dealt with. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, the Member for Emerson shows a tremendous disregard and disrespect for the input of the fishermen of Manitoba. In each of the lakes, th ere is a Fishermen 's Asso cia tion tha t works with the department in establishing the criteria for eligibility for lic ences.

Let's deal with Lake Manitoba for just a moment. The fishermen were involved in setting of the criteria which indica ted that if you were a resident of the lake area and if you fished two out of the five years, you would be eligible for a licence. It was the fishermen who asked to have those established and we worked on those criteria. It was on the basis of those criteria that licences were issued. Now the Member for Emerson is saying tha t we somehow have ruined the system. We have all ocated too many licences. We have responded to the inter ests of the fishermen. He ind icates that there is a dilemma.

Let me indicate to you an example of a dilemma that exists. He is asking for consistency amongst fishermen, and only this afternoon the Member tor Roblin-Russell was saying don't follow such a stringent policy; have the policy apply on an individual basis to the people who operate the forest. If there is a dilemma, an incons istency, it's on that side of the House. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, I can fully sympathize with the concern of this Min ister. He feels he has to lash back because there hasn't been too many good things happening to him in these Estimates, you know.

Whichever department we have covered, he has been running into extreme difficulties. If the Minis ter would come forward right now and ind icate, as I asked him just before I sat down, is there some program in place or direction in place of how he is going to deal with the various permits and quota system , but there is no polic y. Mr. Chairman, I'll tell you someth ing, this is a knee jerk reaction of a young Minis ter who is trying to fight

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 for his life, who doesn't under stand what's going on. He is floundering along. Mr. Chairman, I hate to belabour this endlessly. Mr. Chairman, through you to the Min ister , if the Minis ter somewhere along the line could ind icate what is his perspective in terms EU e future, even a two-year or three-year future in terms of the com mercial fishing industry , where are we going with it? Establish some policy, tell us what you think, Mr.

Minis ter, this is what you'd like to see happen, not on a lake-by-lake basis because that's going to come back to kill you, it's going to come back to haunt you. Tell us where you're going to go with this thing, what you see. It's in the common inter est of the commercial fishermen and all of us here. We want to see the industry flourish; we want to see it do well. Ins tead of the Minis ter being defensive and having no defence, why wouldn't he just tell us what he sees that should be happening? Mr. Chairman, I've always found you to be a very reasonable man.

Is that request unreasonable, that the Minis ter should ind icate what he foresees in the com mercial fishing area within the Province of Manitoba? We can be picky, and I started off being picky between Lake Winnipeg and Lake Manitoba. I've never even gone to the other areas. The Minis ter can tell us what he foresees in this whole thing. We can accept that. If we don't like it, that's tough luck. But there has got to be some direction and we've gotten very little direction from this Min ister and that is why I referred to a knee-jerk react ion. Wherever pressure comes up, he is getting up and being defensive.

Tell us where you're going with the whole ind ustry and then we'll know. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, the Member for Emerson is suggest ing that within the department there is no strategy. I have here a document which was tabled in the Legislature previously, the Manitoba Fisheries Strategy for the Fisheries Branch. If the mem bers would like to take the time to go through that document

section by sect ion, we would be quite prepared to do so. I would otherwise ind icate to the mem bers it is here; it ind icates clearly the role for the department in the commercial fishing ind ustry as we see it, the princ ip les which will gu ide its management. As well, in the last five-year report . A MEMBER: Have you read it? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Yes, I have read it -in the last five-year report to the Legislature on Fisheries, ending 1984, several of the same issues are referenced.

I want to indic ate clearly that we see the comme rcial fishing ind ustry as a very important ind ustry in the Province of Manitoba. It is one that we will continue in our efforts to support. We will work cooperatively with the fishermen. We will continue to recognize a very important role for the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation in marketing the catch of the fishermen, and we will continue to work with the fishermen to put in place those practices which best meet the needs of the fishermen, as seen by fishermen, given the variety of situations that exist in the province.

But I will not subscribe to the notion put forward by the Member for Emerson that we can only have one management practice and one management approach for all the lakes in Manitoba. Surely, we can demons trate more imagination than that. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, this is cute, real cute. The Minis ter still has not ind icated exactly, you know. He refers to the document that he has there. Why won't the Min ister jus t get up and tell us what he foresees in terms of the future, in terms of what should happen, because it's a major, major industry in this province.

He says, well, I filed this document somewhere along the line. Why would the Minister not take the opportunity to put it on the record in terms of how he foresees the com mercial fishing? It's a very, very valuable resource in our province. We fought jointly; both sides of the House fought the Garrison issue because it could jeopardize the great future of our comme rcial fishing indus try. I sort of get a gut react ion from the Minis ter as to where he sees it.

He is the Minis ter responsible and will be for whatever time that he will be there, and we'll leave that open, but if he is here for four years, certainly, even now he must have a vision as to what he sees can happen. Does he see that we will allo w transfer of quota with assets on Lake Manitoba as well as we have on Lake Winnipeg? He says we have to deal with each issue separately. Is that what he foresees happening? Because if we do it on Lake Manitoba, then any commercial fisherman in the province should have the same right. Or does he feel that it should be different? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr.

Chairman, I'm not sure what I would have to do to satisfy the Member for Emerson that I have some view of what the future of the fishing indus try is in Manitoba. Having expressed the views that I have, he doesn't accept those. The fact that he doesn't accept them does not mean that I do not have a view. It simply ind icates that he does not agree with the view that I hold and I don't think I could convince him in the balance of the even ing that we could come to some agreemen t.

I simply want to indicate again that there are different circums tances with respect to production; there are different circumstances with respect to the social sett ing in each of the areas, and I think we have to be sensitive to those. We have always been responsive to the interests of the fishermen and we will continue to work with them in that spirit. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Arthur . MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Chairman, I am somewhat interested in the debate that I've been hearing, and again the Minis ter of Natural Resources, strange as it may seem, is not taking a hold of an area which we feel is extremely important. But I want to point out some inconsistencies, Mr. Chairman. My colleague from Emerson is pointing out the fact that we have got in the Province of Manitoba a different policy for each lake. Well, it seems strange, Mr. Chairman, to me that you're dealing with not so much the matter of the fish and the fishing industry as you are with the fairness and the equity to those individuals who are fishing. 3155

Tuesday, 19 August, 1986 How can you apply several different standards when you 're developing laws and regulations? It 's not clear, Mr. Chairman, how the Minister can sit as a Minister of the Crown, write regulations, writ e legislation , develop policy and have it for each different

section of the province? That's one major, major problem that the Member for Emerson is pointing out. But I want to point out even a greater one , Mr. Chairman . We have the Minister of Natural Resources who sits in a Cabinet with his colleagues who, when they leave that Cabinet or they leave that caucus, they leave as a team. Mr. Chairman , he sits with the Minister of Agriculture who will not allow the sale or the transfer of quota.

He will not allow it, and yet he sits in the same Cabinet Room and comes out and says that he will provide the opportunity for some fishermen to trade and transfer quota, and the Minister of Agriculture won't. It is all over the place, Mr. Chairman. It can't be tolerated in the public kind of democratic system that we have . The Minister this afternoon made reference back to the issue of forestry and I want to just touch on it. Because an individual sold his forest rights or a portion of it, it restricts him now from getting a permit to harvest more forestry . But, Mr.

Chairman, he is now saying that you can trade your fishing quota, that it has nothing to do with the future of your fishing rights. I cannot, for the life of me, see how an individual who claims to be somewhat of a leader, a Cabinet Minister, whether it's in caucus or in the public eye, he is all over the place , Mr. Chairman . He is not demonstrating one bit of consistency . How can you operate? How can you develop three different rules? What are we? A province of 100,000 lakes . Have we got a policy - do we call on the Minister - a policy for 100,000 lakes?

Do we have 100,000 policies for the fishing industry in Manitoba? He's got to come forward with a clear and supportable policy, but he's not doing it. He didn't do it; he hasn't done it in the foresty . He hasn't done it when it comes to any consistency with his colleague, who is the Minister of Agriculture , in the transfer of quota . Where are they at? Where are they at within their Cabinet? It must be like a dog 's breakfast . They say we have got one principle for the dairy farmers in the transfer of quota . We've got three different policies for the transfer of quota within the fishing industry .

My goodness, Mr. Chairman, talk about a smorgasbord of policies and a mixed up dog's breakfast . I can't, Mr. Chairman, see how this Minister has not taken hold of it. There are three areas of inconsistency that this Minister is demonstrating . I have another area of concern dealing with the fishing industry. Our party, Mr. Chairman, during the election campaign of this year made a major commitment to the restocking of the lakes. To the hatchery industry in this province there was a major commitment made . My colleague from Roblin-Russell, I am sure , will want to make a few comments on it as well.

Why have we not heard a major policy development or a major program by this Minister to restock the lakes for a hatchery program to be developed in the northwest region of this province? It is needed, Mr. Chairman; the demonstrated need is there. Mr. Chairman, we've got far too many problems in this industry. We've got far too great a potential to let it be frittered away by an incompetent Minister . So I recommend that he get a hold of it. I recommend that he get a hold of the department , not just to be told by his staff and the people who work for him that it has to be this way or that way.

Let us get some form of consistency. Let 's see him develop a policy so that when we leave this Assembly, so that when we talk to constituents whether it 's dealing with the fishing industry , that we can talk in some form of consistency . But right now, if any memb er of this Legisl ative Assembly was asked what the policy is as far as the fish quota transfer is concerned , I'm telling you, Mr. Chairman , there isn 't one person in the government side , let alone the Opposition , that would understand what he's doing .

What member on his side could stand up and fully explain his policy on transfer of fish quotas ? It 's a shambles. Can't be tolerated , Mr. Chairman, it is the shambles. He doesn 't have the opportunity to sit down with every fisherman or every individual in the province and explain it. He has to have an overall policy, regulative guidelines, and they should be consiste nt, one lake to the other. Of course, certainly he has the responsibility to listen to the fishermens' associations . Thank goodness he is. Too bad , Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Agriculture wouldn't listen to the dairy industry . Yes, Mr.

Chairman , too bad he wouldn't listen to the dairy industry . But I'm saying, this Minister should be able to lay out a policy as to the transfer of quota for the fishing industry in Manitoba . Yes, I agree there has to be some form of regulatory deviation in particular cases. However, there has to be a basic policy when it comes to saying, yes , the quota for fishermen is transferable in the province , there is a value to it. I don 't care whether you're in Lake Manitoba, Lake Winnipeg or whatever lake, but that's the basic policy. Yes, that's the basic policy.

And to this point, the Minister can't even stand up and say that he's got one consistent policy on that basic principle - quota value transferable, right, quot a value transferable should be a basic policy. But he's saying, no, Lake Winnipeg is this, Lake Man itoba is this and the rest of the lakes will differ . You can't differ on major policy and major areas of principle when it comes to the public . All I'm saying is you have to work, Mr. Chairman, from the basis of fairness and equitability for all individuals in that industry. And that's not happening . The Minister , I'm sorry again, every time we come to a

section of his department that's new , he hasn't taken a hold of it. My recommendation is that he should . He should take a little bit better interest in the whole policy matter, Mr. Chairman , and deal with it so that the general public can understand it so that we can pass these Estimates with a little more ease . Mr. Chairman , my colleague, the Member for Emerson, has asked if he's got a consistent policy? If he hasn't , why hasn 't he? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman , it's interesting to listen to the Member for Arthur .

In each of the sections it seems that he finds it necessary to voice that doom and gloom kind of an attitude with respect to this department. It is also interesting to note that a number of the members opposite are the very people who have suggested that we, on this side of the House , are 3156

Tuesday , 19 August, 1986 committed to a particular ideology and we're so intransigent that we won't deviate from that. What we have on this side, what we have now is an example on the opposite side; they are not prepared to entertain an approach wherein there is flexibil ity, where the inter ests of the fishermen are taken into account. They are saying whatever approach you have, you have to have that apply un iformly throughout the province. Don't consider the inte rests of the people in the different areas. I would challenge the Member for Arthur to give me some indication.

He seems to indicate that he has that kind of a rapport with the fishing commun ity. Giv e me an indication from the fishing community that they want one approach to this issue throughout the province, that they do not want this flexibil ity. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman, I laid it out on two bases. I cannot understand how they can have one policy for dairy quota transfer within his own Cabinet, and another where the Min ister of Agriculture says you can't put value on quota, you can't have value on quota. Sin, it's the worst thing you can do.

You can't just take the government-given right to catch fish, the quota business and give value to the producers of milk. The Minis ter of Natural Resources says, yes, we can give value to it. Just blow them apart, it's a wide open difference. Mr. Chairman. The other point I raised, and the Min ister said to me, how can I say to the fishermen of the Province of Manitoba that they need the same thing? I said the basis of fairness. You won't find one fisherman that disagrees with me that you have to have a fair and equitable polic y, a fair and equitable policy on the basis of quota transfer and quota value.

Every fisherman should have the quota value and the quota transfer availability to them. We, Mr. Chairman, agree that you treat people fairly and equitabl y. That's what we're asking for. This Minister is not telling us that that's what his policy is. He said on Lake 1 we're going to have this kind of a polic y, on Lake 2 we're going to have this polic y. But he deviates from that principle, Mr. Chairman, he deviates from that principle of fairness and being equitable. He deviates on the basis of being in a Cabinet where a Minister is not allowed to happen, he deviates by having value.

Then he goes into the indus try in which he represents and he's all over the map. In fact, you might say he's all over the waterfront, Mr. Chairman. I'm suggesting to him that a basic policy of principle, fairness and equitability to th ose individuals is what we're asking for, that's all he has to say, that he's prepared to carry it out throughout the province. That's a fairly straigh tforward message for the Min ister. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Chairman, the Minister and some of his colleagues can sort of make fun of the Member for Arthur in terms of his views, but this is exactly what is happening.

I raised it some time ago. Because having been a dairyman for 17 years, Mr. Chairman, I was the one that fought and I believe there is value on quota. This Min ister .stopped Class 2 transfers of quota in the dairy indus try. I'm talking of the Minister of Agricultur e, which is contrary to what has happened in the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Chairman, I will predict to you right now that the negotiations that the Minister of Agriculture has for the transfer of quota that we will be coming back, contrary to his freeze on it, will now be allowing value on quota.

He might say, 50-50, 50 goes back to the board, 60- 40. I don't care what it is, but I know that this Minster of Agriculture will have to lick his wounds and indic ate that he made a mis take. Because in the last elec tion, Mr. Chairman, the reason why my majority increased dramatically from '81 was because of this Minister of Agriculture, because of his pol icy. I'm saying to the Min ister of Natural Resources that his lack of policy and direction to the direction that you want to go, stick with it and do it. Show that you have the intestinal fortitude to take a direction.

Ch oose the policy you want to go with but then do it. But don't have this wishy-washy stuff where you go with, yes, Lake Winnipeg, yes; Lake Manitoba, no, but they're not asking for it. How are you going to deal with that? A year or two from now you'll have to deal with that, and how about the rest of them? All we are trying to il lustrate to this Minister in pursuing this matter, and we've gone on it now for a while, is choose and tell us which direction you want to go. This Min ister waffles all over the place unfortuna tely. Tell us, give us your gut reaction how you see the situation.

Do you want value on quota in the fish industry to be transferable? Not just for Lake Winnipeg. Do you want it for Lake Manitoba as well for all commercial fishermen? Tell us where you're at, that's all we ask. The Minister keeps fudging and trying to cover hims elf and trying to look good. If he was forthright and told us what his principles were. You're government, you got elected four or five months ago. Tell us what you want. We have to accept that, we might not like it. We'll criticize. But tell us which direction you're going. Can the Minis ter now tell us where he's going with his policy? HON. L.

HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure that the Member for Emerson refuses to unde rstand. I have indicated clearly what my position is. He refuses to accept the position and states for the record that I have not clarified my position. I have clearly indic ated what my position is with respect to the treatment of quotas in dealing with fishermen. But the Mem ber for Emerson indicates that we are not being flexible, we are not focusing on issues. We indicated that we are to be flexible in terms of the discussions. We are not even able to contain the discussions to fisheries here.

The Member for Emerson chooses to expand it to another department. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member tor Roblin-Russel l. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr. Chairman, I would like to just venture on the topic of the sport fishing ind ustry. The Member tor Arthur indicated that there has been a request to construct a small fish hatchery on the Lake of the Prairies. To this point, there has been some work done on the feasi bility of a fish hatchery in that area and also the need for it.

I think that anybody who is inter ested in fishing or has done any fishing probably knows where Lake of the Prairies is and the fact that it is a fairly popular fishing spot in Manitoba. 3157

Tuesday, 19 August, 19 86 The Department of Natural Resources, as a matter of fact, has already taken a look at several locations where a fish hatchery might be located in that area. There are many positive factors why a fish hatchery would be a positive attribute, not only to that area but also to many of the lakes in Mani toba and in Saskatchewan.

I'm wondering whether this Minister - I recognize the fact that he has only been in this position for a short time -but I'm wondering whether he has given any consi deration to this point, to the establishment of a fish hatchery on the Shell River or in that area of the Lake of the Prairies, a pickerel fish hatche ry. I'm not talking about the trout fish hatchery which is being started by an individual. I'm talking about a fish hatchery for pickerel and northern pike. I'm wondering whether he's given it any consideration or whether, in fact, he is going to be considering it positively or seriously in the future.

HON. L. HARAPIAK: I want to indicate to the Member for Roblin-Russell that I am aware that there is an individual entrepreneur who is looking at establishing a trout fish hatchery in that area. Certain ly, in terms of our own efforts, our stocking effort for Lake of the Prairies, 4.5 million is far in excess of many of the other locations. I'm just scan ning the list here and I don't see another location in which we have stocked more. Lake of the Prairies, 4.5 million, received more walleye or pickerel fry than any other lake in Manitoba.

So despite the fact that there may not be a hatchery there, the stock is transferable; we can move it. We have done just an excellent job on Lake of the Prairies in terms of stocking that. - (Interje ction) - Why do you need a hatchery; you're getting fry. MR. L. DERKACH: I'm not disputing the fact that Lake of the Prairies received an excellent stock of fingerlings in th e past few years. I cert ainly commend the department for recognizing that this is a heavily fished area and the need for stocking that lake.

The results have proven very positive in terms of sto cking that lake, because of the fact that it is a rich lake in terms of the food for pickerel and for other fish species. The qu es tion I'm asking is with regard to the establishment of a fish hatchery in that location, because of its proximity to other lakes in Manitoba and also to some lakes in Saskatchewan, and the fact there has been some study done in terms of why a fish hatchery would be feasi ble and why it would be very advantageous to have one situated in that area. I'm wondering whether the Min ister has taken a look at that particular aspect.

We don't want a fish hatchery there just to stock that particular lake. We're talking about a fish hatchery there that could stock other lakes. I think some of the advantages have been pointed out by the department and by many individuals in that area. There's the fact of the fresh water supply; the way the lake itself is situated; the locations where the hatchery could be located and where fish could be housed. Should the fish get into a situation where they become nervous and have to be released , that can be done without any great jeopardy to the lake or to the fish.

I'm wondering whether the department and whether this Minister has conside red the feasibility of going 3158 ahead and constructing a fish hatchery in that area, or whether in fact they have plans to do so in the futur e since this is a project that has already been talked about for several years . HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I want to indicate to the member that we currently have capacity that is yet unused, so at this time there would be - certainly to build another hatch ery, I think, would be unwise.

At some point in the future, if we expanded and the existing capacity was utili zed, consideration would have to be given to another loca tion. At this point, we have unusued hatchery capacity so there is no plan to build a hatchery in that area. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr. Chairman, I'm wondering why some of the lakes in our particular area have been, as a matter of fact, waiting to get fry into their lakes. If there is such abundance of fish hatchery facilities avai lable, then why have these lakes been waiting to receive fry in their lakes?

As a matter of fact, they haven 't been stocked for a number of years and the fish are being depleted in some of these lakes. The fact is that a fish hatchery in that area would not be a major investment. It's not an investment that will cost millions of dollars. The fact is that from that particular location, fish fry don't have to be lifted twice. You could have that whole hatchery and housing there and fish can be taken from that location directly to some of the northern lakes.

That's why I'm talking about the advantage of having a fish hatchery there as com pared to some of the other locations where we have hatcheries at the present time. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I accept the statement of the Member for Roblin-Russell that there may be some lakes in which fry have not been placed. Some lakes don't lend themselves to placement of fry; given certain conditions, there would not be the high survival rate. There would be that consid erat ion.

Even given the excess capacity, there would be a cost associated with bringing our reproduction to capacity and we have to be conscious of those costs. I simply go back to the point that I made earlier, that in terms of our stocking effort in that region, represented by the Member for Roblin-Russell, the Lake of the Prairies, and the south end of the Duck Mountain, I think there's been just a superlativ e effort in terms of restock ing. We will look to imp rove our capacity in the future. MR. L.

DERKACH: I'd like to just pose a couple of questions to the Min ister with regard to the trout hatchery that I guess is under construction at the present time.

My question to the Minister is, with regard to the development of the whole area around the Lake of the Prairies and the way in which this particular project was let and the monies were all ocated for it, can the Minis ter explain to the House whether there was an open tender for this kind of thing, whether there were proposals submit ted by a host of individuals or was this particular development one that was proposed by an individual and granted just on the basis of his particular proposal? I'd like some information on that.

Tuesday , 19 August, 19 86 HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Member for Roblin-Russell could be more specific. Is he talking about the trout fishery project? MR. L. DERKACH: Yes. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, just in conversat ion with staff here, I'm advised that this is strictly a venture by this particular entrepreneur; he had an idea; he's approached the different branches of government to gain the site and the access to water and it was not an initia tive on the part of the department. I can only indicate that. MR. L.

DERKACH: Can the Minis ter then tell the House what kinds of properties this person was able to obtain? Was he able to purcha se Crown land, lease Crown land for an extended period of time? Did he receive in fact, monies from the department or from any department of the government to venture in to this particular program, and what conditions were tied to this particular project? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, this project is not directly affiliated with this department. There was consultation in terms of the technical advice so there was commu nication there.

There is no funding from the Department of Natural Resources. In terms of the arrangements for the site and perhaps a permit to access the water, we could search that out and get that for the Member for Roblin-Russell, but it relates to other branches and we don't have that information here at this time. I can only ind icate that it is a private sector venture, consultation in terms of the technical information with the Fisheries Branch, and no financial input from the Department of Natural Resources. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr.

Chairman, I would hope that there is some type of monitoring, or some kind of involvement from the Department of Natural Resources, since the fish that this person is going to be producing are trout, a species which is not presently available or present in the Lake of the Prairies, and the fact that this particular site is very close and adjacent to the Lake of the Prairies where fish could in fact, escape into the Lake of the Prairies, which could cause environmental harm to the fish that are presently in the lake, and I'm wondering whether the Department of Natural Resources is aware of what's going on there and whether they approve of the particular site because of the fact it's so close to the Lake of the Prairies itself.

HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, if the member is concerned about the species of fish that might be introduced, the Federal Department of Fisheries would be responsible for the movement of the different species into the province, and certainly at some stage when the species were here and in terms of observing what was happening at the site, our fisheries biologis ts would be aware of those issues at that point. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr.

Chairman, the fact that the land is actually Crown land, which is under the jurisdiction of this particular Min ister , and the fact that there is a plan to develop some 66 acres, as I understand, of this particular project, and because of the proximity of it to the Lake of the Prairies, which is under the jurisdiction of this Min ister, I'm wondering whether the Min ister is aware of the plans that have been set for this particular site which is Crown land, has that plan been submit ted to the Department of Na tur al Resources, do we have any idea of where the capital inv estment is coming from?

Have there been grants given for the development of this project? I'm not indicating that I'm opposed to the project, all I'm trying to do is find out some honest information as to what really is transpiring there because there are many residents of the area who have similar kinds of questions about the project because they just haven't got the information, and it is bordering on some private property and it's going to also affect a natural water reservoir, freshwater reserv oir where residents get their water and they're concerned about that part of it as well. HON. L.

HARAPIAK: It's unf ortuna te, perhaps, that we didn't get into this discussion, Mr. Chairman, when we had the people from the Crown Lands Branch here. They may have been able to advise us directly on that. With the staff that I have with me at this time, I can only indicate, as I indicated to the Member for Roblin Russell earlier, we will get the details on the particular project. I, personally, am not familiar with the proposal that he is referencing. MR. L. DERKACH: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank the Minis ter for his response, and I would hope that he can get that information for us.

I apologize for not having brought this up before, but I wasn 't in the House at the time. So if we can get that information at some date in the near future, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Mr. Chairman, perhaps one bit of information that I would like to add. We had some information shared with respect to stocking for sport fishing.

I want to indicate clearly that there is a very substantial effort on the part of the department for stocking for commercial fishing as well, and in 19 86, over 64 million walleye were stocked in various lakes in the province and over 87 million whitefish in different lakes in the Province of Manitoba so I would want members to be aware that there is a considerable effort, both in terms of the sport fishery and the commercial fishery with respect to resto cking. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to say one or two words on the sport fishing angle, or the trout farming angle. The Minister obviously has the figu res with him on the Stocking Program for 1986, what has been stocked where, I don't want him to give it all to us in detail if he could provide the critic with a copy, I'm su

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-1-70b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 1st hansardpdf 70b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	89e8e4e06d8626f49c3b9fd8c36ac4509ba5af6e

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