Manitoba Hansard — 23 rd 1965 (Sitting 71, 27th Legislature, 4th Session)

27-4-71

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

1797 THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA, 2:30 o' c lock, Friday, April 23r d, 1965. Opening Prayer by Madam Speaker MADAM SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions MR. B. P. STRICKLAND (Hamiota): Madam Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Weather Modifications Limited praying for the passing of &n Act to provide for the Disposition of the funds of Weather Modifications Limited. MADAM SPEAKER: Reading and Rece iving Petitions Presenting Reports by Standing and. Special Committees HON. STEWART E.

McLEAN(A ttorney-Genera l) (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Law Amendments. MR. CLE:RK: Your Standing Committee on Law Amendments begs leave to present the following as their fifth report: Your Committee met on Tuesday, April 20th, 1965, and on Friday, April 23 rd, 19 65. Your Committee has considered Bills: No. 27,

An Act to amend The Trustee Act; No. 42,

An Act to amend The Metropolitan Winnipeg Act (2); No. 48,

An Act to amend The West Kildonan Charter and to validate by-law No. 45/64/ A of The City l)f West Kildonan; And has agreed to report the same without amendment. Your .C ommittee has also considered Bills: No. 65,

An Act to amend The Liquor Con trol Act; No. 67,

An Act respecting The Unsatisfied Judgment Fund and the Administration thereof; No. 68,

An Act respecting Highways and The Highways Department; No. 69,

An Act respecting The Department of Public Works; No. 83,

An Act respecting The Rural Municipali ty of Victoria; And has agreed to report the same with certain amendments. Your Committee recommends that Bill No. 74,

An Act to amend The Judgments Act, be withdrawn from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, and that this bill be referred to the Standing Committee on Statutory Regulations and Orders. All of which is respectfully submitted. MR. M•JLEAN: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Education, that the report of the committee be received. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion ca rried. MR. McLEAN: I move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Education that Bill No. 74,

an Act to amend The Judgments Act, be withdrawn from the Standing Committee on La w Amendments and that this bill be referred .to the Standing Committee on Statutory Regula tions and Orders. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. MR. RUSSELL PAULLEY (Leader of the New Democra tic Party) (Radisson): Madam Speaker, I just want to rise in protest to the referral of this bill to the Committee.

Incidental ly, Madam Speaker, the Committee has not as yet been constituted; that is, the Committee - as far as I am aware the Committee has not yet been constituted, unless I have missed some thing, to which this bill will be referred. However, my main purpose in speaking at this time is in protest. I do not find anything in this bill that is objectionable. No representations were made to the Comm ittee in opposition to the bill, and the object of the bill was to bring into more realistic valueE; of property today as opposed to those which are now contained in the Act. MR.

M'J LEAN: Madam Speaker I will be -- MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motion Introduction of Bills MR. JAMES COW AN Q. C. , (Winnipeg Centre) introduced Bill No . 134,

an Act to in co rporate Ca nadian Lutheran World Relief. MADAM SPEAKER : Before the Orders of the Day, I would like to attract your atten tion to the gallery where there are some 35 Grades 1 to 8 students from Neu Bergthal School under the direction of Mr. Driedger. This school is situated in the constituency of the Honour able the Member for Rhinela nd. There are also 9 Winnipeg Girl Guides No. 138 under the direction of Mrs. Routley. These Girl Guides are from the constituency of the Honourable the Member for Brokenhead; and some 10 members of the Mayfield 4H Club under the direction of Mrs.

Kenny, also from the constituency of the Honourable the Member for Brokenhead. On behalf of all members of this Legislative Assembly, I welcome you. Orders of the Day.

1798 April 23 rd, 1965 MR. ELMAN GUTTORMSON (St. George): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I asked for an Order for Return yesterday and the Minister of Agriculture replied there was no such agreement, yet in the Department of Estimates discussed yesterday we voted money for an ARDA agreement between the Provincial and Federal Government. Could he ex plain his answer? HON. GEORGE HUTTON (Minister of Agriculture) (Rockwood-lbe rville): There has been an agreement in effect for three years. The new agreement hasn't been signed. MR .

STEVE PATRICK (Assiniboia): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, would like to direct a question to the Honourable the Minister of Education. I wonder if he 's aware that there is still no teacher at the Manitoba Institute of Technology as far as the comp tometer and business machines are concerned. I bel ieve it involves somewhere around five or six machines and somewhere of a class of about 60 people, or students.

There has been no teacher for almost two months and the situation remains the same as of this morning -- the information that I get direct from many of the students and some of the parents that are seriously concerned about this matter. HON. GEORGE JOHNSON (Minister of Education) (Gimli): Madam Speaker, this is not the information I have received from the director of the Institute but I will check once again. MR. PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, if I may before the Orders of the Day; on March 17th, I had the privilege of drawing to the attention of the House that that was St. Patrick's Day.

I seem to be a loner here today, wearing a rose which is symbo lic of that great country of England, which today is ce lebrating the birth date of their patron saint, St. George. In order that there be no misunderstanding, my people were of English origin and I'm proud to wear the red rose of England today. HON. STERLING R. LYON Q.

C., (Minister of Mines and Natural Resources) (Fort Garry): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are proceeded with, yesterday I be lieve it was ,the Honourable Member for Brokenhead made an enquiry concerning the possible extension of the trapping season, with particular reference to the Netley Marsh. I can con firm that there have been some trappers in touch with the Department concerning this _matter, but the recommendation of the experts and of the Director is that there be no extension be cause of the quick drop-off in the quality of the pelts.

However, in those cases where trappers may not yet be able to reach traps already set due to high water, arra ngements have been made that in such cases the traps and any muskrats that they may contain can be picked up after the st atutory closing of the season, which I understand is Saturday, the 24th of April. MR. E. R. SCHR EYER (Brokenhead): Madam Speaker, I wish to thank the Honourable Minister for his diligence in seeking out this specific bit of information. MR. GILDAS MOLGAT (Leader of the Opposition)(Ste.Rose): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the First Mini,ster.

I asked of him earlier this week regarding the ca ncella tion of the tax, the one cent tax on diesel fuel, and he informed me that he would see if the notices had gone out. Have the dealers been informed yet in the province ? HON. DU FF RUBLIN (Premier and Provincial Treasurer) (Wolseley): I checked this with the Department, Madam Speaker, and I'm informed that notices went out to all concerned several days ago. MR.

NELSON SHOEMAKER (Gladstone): Madam Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are proceeded with, I would like to direct a question to my honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture, and it is in connection with 'the answer that he just gave to the Honourable Mem ber for St. George. My question would be: is there an annual agreement signed between this government and the Government of Canada in connection with ARDA, or is it necessary to sign a new agreement for every project that is contemplated? MR.

HUTTON: Madam Speaker, there is a master agreement which provides for fur ther agreements or contracts, project contracts, under this program, and so whenever a new program is entered into, a contract or agreement is arrived at in respect to the specific pro gram. Madam Speaker, these are not annual agreements. They're project agreements. MR. GORDON E. JOHNSTON (Portage la Prairie): Madam Speaker, my I address a question to the Honourable Minister of Mines and Natural Resources -- two questions. 1. Is the Minister aware that there have been fires on the Delta Marshes this spring?

And the second question: if he is aware of this, are any steps being taken to stop the widespread firing of the marshes, which are valuable breeding grounds for the ducks? MR. LYON: Madam Speaker, I am not aware of that, but I will certainly have my honourable friend's al legation looked into at once.

April 23rd, 1965 1799 MR. J. M. FROESE (Rhine land): Madam Speaker, there is an

article in the Altona Echo commenting on a meeting of the International Joint Committee in connection with the Pem belier Dam, and I would like. to know whether the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture could tell us whether at the time that they are anticipating some meetings in Walhalla in this connec tion, whether some meetings will be held in Manitoba on this same project ? MR. HUTTON: Madam Speaker, I am aware that the International Joint Commission is going to hold local meetings in the general area that is interested in the development of the Pembina River, and anticipate a public meeting in Manitoba.

MR. MORRIS A. GRAY (lnkster) : Madam Chairman, I'd like to direct a question to the Premier; to tell us the amount, the final amount of contribution towards the Pan-Am erican Games; and secondly, whether the Legislature is authorizing a certain sum of money towards the Games. Have they anything to say as to the construction of the so-call ed permanent build ings during the Pan- American Games? MR. RUBLIN: Madam Speaker, the financial arr angements have already been given in the Legislature so I don't think it necessary to repeat them now.

There is an item in the Estimates which is being held open, on which there may be a further discussion if members wish. Under the contract, under the agreement with Ottawa, the full authority and control over the actual management of operations of the Games, including the location, structu res and that sort of thing, is in the hands.of the Pan-Ame rican Games Society and not in the hands of the province. MR. FROESE: Madam Speaker, if I may ask a supplementary question to .the one I put to the Minister of Agriculture.

I think at the meeting that they had in Washington there was three plans submitted in connection with the Pembe lier Dam. One was for $26 million and that would involve only one dam at Walhalla. There were also two other propositions; one with another dam south of Morden and a third dam through the west. Does he know whether they have finalized their decision on any one particula r plan, or whether there is still a possibility that different plans .could be adopted whereby we would have some dams in Manitoba? MR.

HUTTON: Madam Speaker, I think the members should understand that in talking about a study, and before any of the projects considered by the 13tudy can be entered into, there would have to be an agreement between the ju risdictions concerned, first of all to determine whether they want to do something with it, and if they decide to. do something with it, the ap proach that they will take. Nobody has any idea at the present time what the final decision will be on the part of the parties .involved.

All we have is a study which sets out the possibilities and the advantages and disadvantages of the various proposals. ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: Order for a Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Brokenhead. MR. SCHREYER: Madam Spaaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Membe r for Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (

a) The number ofpro perty acquisitions in the Portage la Prairie area, regarding the Portage Diversion; (

b) the number of settlements made in each of the months since the commencement of the program of acquisition; (

c) the ratio of properties acquired thus far, to the total number of properties to be acquired; and finally, whether any of the acquisitions have been. made by expropriation pro cedure. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Member for Brokenhead. MR. SCHREYER: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourabl e Member for Seven Oaks, that an Order of .the House do issue for a Return showing: (

a) the number of com munity pastures presently establ ished in the are.a East of the Red River; (l;

J) the acrea ge in volved in each case; and (

c) the numbe r of community pastures to be built in the area.Ea st of the Red River, according to present plans; and (

d) the acreage involved. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing iri the name of the Honourable the Mem ber for Brokenhead. MR. SCHREYE R: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Membe r for

1800 April 23rd, 1965 (MR. SCHREYER cont'd) .. .. .. . Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: 1. The name of the property owners and the location of the property involved in each of the 62 cases where the Department of Water Conservation rejected complaints, and/or appli ca tions regarding repair of pumps and wells in the area in close proximity to the Floodway;and 2. The nature of the problem prompting the complaint in each of the 62 rejected cases. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion ca rried.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honour able the Mem- ber for Brokenhead. · MR. SCHREYER: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (

a) the total number of Cr own land graz ing permits issued in the area East of the Red River; and (

b) the total acrea ge involved; and (

c) the total number of Crown land hay permits issued by the Department, Ea.St of the Red River; and (

d) the acrea ge involved. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion ca rried. MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Mem ber for Brokenhead. MR. SCHRE YER: Madam Speaker, I finally wish to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: (

a) the num ber of settlements made between the Department of Mines and Natural Resources and the Pine Ridge property owners, in each of the months since that such transactions have been made -- commenced; (

b) the ratio of settlements to the total number of properties expropriated - to be expropriated. Madam Speaker, I would ask indulgence to insert the words "to be" before the word "expropriated" -- (

i) in Springfield municipality, (ii) in St. Clements municipality. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion. HON. GURNEY EVANS (Minister of Industry and Commerce) (Fort Rouge): Madam Speaker, I think we should clarify the wording of the question. I don't think there's any matter of substa nce here. My honourable friend did make a correct ion, as I understand it, in Item (

b) by inserting the words "to be" , and that 's certainly agreed to. I take it that the last line of

Section (

a) is at least unusual where the words appear "of the months since that such transact ions have been made ." MR. SCHREYER: Madam Speaker, I thank the Honourable Minister for pointing out the typographical error. The word "that" in the last line of (

a) should be deleted, simply de leted, and as the Honourable Minister pointed out, in (

b) the words "to be" should be inserted before the word "expropriated". I believe that c !ears it up. MR. EV ANS: .. .. . , ... . by general consent:? MADAM SPEAKER put the question. MR. LYON: Madam Speaker, before the question is put I wonder if my honourab le friend-- I think I understand what he means. He means the expropriation with reference to the Birds Hill Provincial Park, but there are of course other expropriations perhaps with refer ence to 59 Highway and other matters going on out there, and I was wondering if he meant to con fine this question to the Birds Hill Provincial Park? MR.

SCHREYER: Yes, Madam Speaker. I thought that reference to the Department of Mines and Resourc es would make that clear, but if it is not clear I certainly wish to make it clea r now that I'm referring to the park. · MR. LYON: Madam Speaker , with leave, I wonder if I might ask a question pertaining to the previous Order. I ca n only do it with leave . MADAM SPEAKER: Has the Honourable Member leave to proceed? Agreed. MR. · LYON: Madam Speaker , I'm sorry I didn't notice this . l have it marked on another piece of paper to ask the question.

The question was with reference to the total number of Crown land grazing permits issued in the area East of the Red River. I was wondering if my honourable friend could give us some idea in that Order of the time period that he is interest ed in. He would mean leases that are currently in effect, I would take it, for 196 5? MR. SCHREYER: Madam Speaker, yes; I mean here the number of permits in effect in the most recent ca lendar year or full year -- in effect. MR. LYON: Fine. MR.

EVANS: !think -- would I be right in saying, Madam Speaker, that we must now put the question on the ia.St of the Hono� rable Member's Orders?

April 23 rd, 1965 1801 MADAM SPEAKER put the quest ion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried . MADAM SPEAKER: Order for Return standing in the name of the Honourable the Mem ber for St. George. MR. GUTTORMSON: Madam Speaker, I move, sec onded by the Member for St. Boniface, that an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing: 1. The total cost of PTH 59 from the junction of PTH 4 and 59 to the junction of PTH 59 and 12. 2. The number of contractors em ployed. 3. How much money was paid to each contractor. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried.

MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed reso lution of the Honourable the Lea der of the Opposition, and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable the Mini ster of Agriculture. In my opinion this amendment is in order, arid any honourable member wishing to speak may do so. MR. GUTTORMSON: Ayesand Nays, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the Members . MR. LYON: What's the motion ? On what? MR. GUTTORMSON: On the Speaker's ruling. MR. LYON: You can't have ayes and nays when there's been no challenge made. My honourable friend stands up and says "ayes and nays". On what?

There's been no challenge made. MADAM SPEAKER: Will the Honourable Member make the motion please? MR. GUTTORMSON: I challenge your ruling, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members. The question before the House: Shall the ruling of the Chair be sus tained ?

A st anding vote was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messrs : Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Carroll, Cherniack, Cowan, Evans, Gray, Groves, Harris, Harrison, Hutton, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Lis saman, Ly on, McDonald, McGregor, McKellar, McLea n, Mills, Moeller, Paulley, Roblin, Schreyer, Seaborn, Shew man, Smellie, Stane s, Steinkopf, Strickland, Weir, Witney, Wright and Mrs. Morrison. NAYS: ·Messrs: Barkman, Campbell, Desja rdins, Froese, Guttormson, Hillhouse, Johnston, Molgat, Patrick, Shoemaker, Smerchanski, Tanchak and Vie lfaure. MR. CLERK: Yeas, 36; Nays 13 .

MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried. Any honourable member wishing to speak? Are you ready for the question ? MR. PAULLEY : Madam Speake r, I think maybe I should say a word on this matter.

I take it that in accordance with Rule 201 of Beauchesne on an amendment of this nature, both the main motion and the amendment are subject of debate at the same time and can be con·- sidered. · Madam Speaker, I appreciate the objectives of the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture in his amendment, because as I read what the Minister implies in his amendment, is a method by which there may be greater protection to the livestock industry in the Province of Manitoba, and that they will not be prejudiced by the recommendations which have been made, by the re commendations -- by the Committee of Agriculture and Coloniz ation in the House of Commons.

I'm sure that all members of the House will agree that we here in Manitoba - and I would sug. gest also so far as Saska tchewan and Alberta are concerned - must do whatever we can to pro tect the livestock indus try in the Prairie provinces. And also, we must protect the Canadian Wheat Board and make sure that no endeavours be made so that the powers of the Wheat Board may be diminished by actions at Ottawa or anywhere el se . I think, Madam Speaker, that is the position ins ofar as the amendment by the Minister of Agriculture is concerned.

However, I do wish that the Minister had retained that portion of the main motion that est ablished the principle of a two-price system for No. 1 Northern Wheat at Fort William. I'm sure he, like most of us in the House, are fully appreciative of the fact of the fluctuations in wheat prices, and now that it appears that there is going to be a greater de gree of competition for - or in the wheat trade ..: that it is more and more necessa ry that our Canadian farmer, particularly those in the western plains, are protected and are assured of a reasonable price for their product.

So I say that I can support the amendment of the Minister of Agriculture because of the purport of it, the intent of it, as I read into his amendment, but I regret very much, Madam Speaker, that it appears to me , on reading the amendment, that it will delete the posit ion insofar as the grain farmer is concerned and will not give to the grain

1802 April 23r d, 1965 (MR. PAUL LEY cont'd) .. .. ... farmer a measure of stability insofar as price is concerned based on Fort William. MR. FROESE : Madam Speaker, I just wan�ed to make my position clear, too. I intend to support the amendment, as well, that is before us, because I too have a concern as to what might happen if we see this new agency come &.long. And since there are more .votes in the east than there are in the west, we could find ourselves in a predicament where things might be done which would not be in the interests of the western farmer, and certainly I can support the amendment.

MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR. SHOEMAKE R: Madam Speaker, if no one else wishes to speak at this time, I move, seco nded by the Honourable Member for St. Boniface, that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER : The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for St. George, and the proposed amendment by the Honourable the Member for St. Vital. The Honourable the Member for Carillon. MR. LEONARD A.

BARKMAN (Carillon) : Madam Speaker, I'd like to ask the indulgence of this House to have this matter st and. MADAM SPEAKER: Agreed. The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Ethelbert Plains, and the proposed amendment by the Honourable the Member for Brokenhead. The Honourable the Member for Ass iniboia. MR. PATRICK: Madam Speaker, in taking

part in this debate I promise to be very brief. After I had the opportunity to read Hansard, I have discovered there is -- an argument de veloped in respect to the resolution is what is the difference between a Comptroller-Gene ral and the Auditor-,General? And after having the opportunity to read Hansard, I notice that the members that have taken

part in this debate, some of them be long to the legal fraternity, and certainly I'm not qualified to debate the point, the legality, the difference between the Auditor General and the Comptroller-General. However, I did not find any unanimity in their debate, so I feel somewhat better now that I can express my views on the difference, and I do recall when the Honourable Member for Ethelbert Plains did introduce the resolution, he tried and explicitly st ated what the difference was.

The Comptroller-General, he said, is not concerned with the mon·3Y - the way it was spent -b ut he is concerned that proper amounts are paid in accordance with appropriations. On the other hand, he did st ate the Auditor-General has the full right to look into complete files, records, in connec tion with any particular project, and to see if there's any discrepancy that he might find. For instance, he can go into any project and see for himself what is going on, and he has complete supervision of expenditures of public money. I feel the Honourable Mem ber for St. John's has taken the same following.

I think he also stated that he was sure the monies are spent in accordance with the budget, as far as the Comptroller-General was con cerned, while the Auditor-General's object ive is to view the method in which the monies are spent, whether that money was spent in proper and careful manner . I' m not sure personally if the Comptroller in our province has the right to start investi gating and checking to see if money is spent efficiently in most departments .

I think his con cern is probably more of an auditor, to see that it is recorded, and more or less of a book keeper, so I don't know why the government is opposed to this resolution because surely -- I had the opportunity to look into the Auditor-General's report that he presents to the House of Commons, and he finds many discrepancies in many departments . Some of them are probably not through any fault of the department. It's just that he finds an irregularity and can point out, and proper measures can be taken to st raighten the matter out, and that corrective measures can be taken.

Now, I had an opportunity to check through the report of the Auditor-General that's pre sented to the House of Commons, and it points out the functions and his duties: "The Auditor Gene ral shall report annually" -- I'd like to quote just in brief here -- "to the House of Com mons, the results of his examinations, and shall call attention to every case in which he has observed that (

a) any officer or employee has wilfully or negligently omitted to collect or re ceive any money belonging to Canada; (

b) fillY public money was not duly accounted for and paid into Consolidated Revenue Fund; (

c) any appropriation was exceeded or was applied to a purpose or in a manner not authorized by Parliament; (

d) an expenditure was not authorized or was not properly vouched or certified; (

e) there has been a deficiency or loss through the fraud, default,

April 23 rd, 1965 1803 (MR. PATRICK cont'd) ....... or mistake of any person; or (

f) a special warrant authorized the payment of any money; and to any other case that the Auditor-General considers should be brought to the notice of the House of Commons." I unders tand he has to table this report every year to the Speaker of the House, which is presented to the members in the House of Commons. I can go further, and there's many cases that he finds where money has been misapprop riated, and some very good examples are listed in this report. On Page 20,

Section 49 - Defalcation of locally engaged employee in Canberra, Australia - a defalcation by a locally engaged accountant employed by the Canadian Missi on in Canberra. The Chief Treasury Officer in the Department of External Affairs was dispatched to Canberra to complete the inves tigation and reported a total defalcation of $1 3, 589 as well as misapprop, riating payments for gasoline amounting to $1, 533 . 00.

The employee had stolen $9, 636 re ceived from prospec tive immigrants to cover cost of airmailing documents to Canada for ex amination; and there's many cases of a similar nature st ated in this report. No. 60: Equipment disposed of in error. In April 1963, a unit of electronic aircraft navi gational equipment, originally costing more than 9, 000, has been es tim ated at a replacement cost of 15, 000, was returned for repairs to an Air Force Supply Section.

Due to an error, the equipment, instead of being repaired, was declared as surplus to Crown Assets Corporation and was sold to a customer for a scrap price of$2 0. 00. The purchaser, in turn, sold the equipment for a nominal sum to an individual, who being aware of the actual value of the unit, refused to return it and be reasonably compensated.

A Board of Enquiry conc luded that faulty procedure respecting the determination as to whether material should be declared surplus to Crown Assets Disposal Corporation contributed to the improper disposal, and expressed appre hension that similar instances might have occurred. The Department has since revised its procedures. So this is the type of things that the Auditor-General is doing .. .... . say, he might find irregularities in departments; just as easily you could find irregularities in many business enterprises which can save people money.

I would say it certainly is a good resolution . · Now the Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre I know just took the opposite view, and he expressed that our· Comptroller-General is in fact an Auditor-General and he does the same duties as the one that's performed by the one in Ottawa.

Well, according to the report I would like to disagree with him, because I don't think the Comptroller-General has at any tinie, to my knowledge, presented any irregularities in any departments, or pointed out any deficiencies, and this is, as far as I could see, what the Auditor-General is doing in Ottawa, so I would like to go on record and hope that some of the other members will change their opinion and support the amendment. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR. MOLGAT: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Mem ber for Lakeside, that the debate be adjourned.

MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion car- ried. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Logan, as amended. The Honourable the Member for Lakeside . , MR. DOUGLAS L. CAMPBEL L (Lak eside): Madam Speaker, I have found this debate a most intere sting and instructive one, and I trust that the other honourable members of the House have also profited by it. I think there's an amusing turn to it that I hope to mention to the committee a bit later on, but in the meantime, may I just review briefly what happened.

My honourable friend the Member for Logan introduced what to me seems to be a most timely reso lution. The questi on of automation, I think, is one that people in all provinces and all walks of life should be paying much attention to, and certainly no body of people should be pay ing more attention to it than the Legis lative Assembly of this province which has such a direct conne ction with the economic program. So I think that a most useful purpose was served by the introduction of this resolution. Automation holds great promise, I'm sure, for benefit and advancement of the people of our province.

It undoubtedly has within it the overtones also of some disloca tion, and so when the proposal of the Honourable the Member for Logan was treated, what I thought, very flip pantly, by the motion that was moved in amendment by the Honourable Member for Roblin, I thought that the government had been cast, actually, in an unfortunate position, because it just wasn't fair to the government's own interest in this matter that their concern should appear to be so light and casual as was indicated by the motion of the Honourable Member for Roblin, and

1804. April 23rd, 1965 (MR.

CAMPBELL cont'd) ...... .. . so I determined that I would try and be helpful to the govern- ment, and t:-y and rescue them from the position into which the Honourable Member for Roblin had - unwittingly I'm sure - cast them, and so I, recogniz ing, Madam Speaker, that I am not an authority on the subject, had to try and seek some sources of information, and I said to my se lf, the place to go for information on this timely subject will be to the report of the - it has been laid on our desk -o f the Manitoba Economic Consu ltative Board, because, I sa id to my self, there is one of the top economic committees that has been set up by the government, re sponsible to the Minister of Indust;ry and Commerce, and there is a group that undoubtedly will be paying some attention to this matter.

So I proceeded to read, with some care, what the sec ond annual report - and it's very up-to- date because it is dated March 1965 - says about the questi on of automation, and I read it most carefully; more carefully than I usually read .my honourable friends' reports because they are so numerous and so voluminous that at times it's hard to find the time to peruse them as closely as we would like to do, but I must compliment the authors of this report on the fact that they have been very concise in their statements with regard to the questi on of automation, and they have done something about it, Madam Speaker ..

And when the Honourable the Member for .Roblin was asked during the course of my honourable friend's remarks - the Leader of the New Democratic Party - to name something that had been done by the government with regard to automation, if my honourable friend had been well advised by the people who, I guess, as si sted him with his. amendment, he would have referred my honourable friend the Leader of the New Democratic Party to the report of the Manitoba Ec onomic Consult ative Board, and he would have said to them: "Now here's a top level group that has been giving cons ideration to this questi on and that has done something about it.

" If he had read this report, he would have, I'm sure, instea d of the very casual treatment that his amendment gave to a serious subject, he would have put something emanating from this report into his amendment instead.

So I sa id, wanting to be helpful to my honourable friends on the government side, "I shall try and rescue them .from the dilemma in which they are cast and I'll, with the help of this re port, I'll prepare something that will get them out of this impasse and give them an· easy way out and a proper way out," and so I took the report and studied it carefully; and based on this report which I hold in my hand, I drew the sub-amendment, Madam Speaker.

And I must say to you, Madam Speaker, that I had some doubts for fear that because what this report of the Manitoba Economic Consul tative Committee, because what this report had said - and !wanted· to quote them correctly -b ecause of what they had said was so close to what my honourable friend's resolution had said, I had some doubts that you might be compelled to find that my sub amendment merely reintroduced the original amendment, and that you might find it nece ssa ry to rule it out of order on those grounds, but luckily for me, Madam Speaker, and for the House, you didn't, and so we were able to give cons ideration to it.

At least we would have been able to give cons ideration to it, but what happened? Nobody - literally nobody -f rom the other side of the House took any notice of it at all . Nobody spoke on it, in spite of the fact that we tried to tell them - and the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party laboured long and arduously to try to once again convince the government of the importance of the subject under discuss ion, and that they should abandon this idle amendment that they had moved and get back into this serious ques tion, into its proper perspective. But no .

Niether my encouragement nor that of the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party could persuade my friends to say another word on the questi on, and what did they do ? They voted down complete ly and soli dly an amendment that says exactly what the report of the Manitoba Economic Consul tative Board said because they have been doing something about this question. They have studied it. They have set up a committee, and Madam Speaker, I was guilty of plagiarism because I copied their exact WQrding. I changed it around a little bit.

I left out a couple of colourful phrases, beca use I was afraid they would be very evident that they were copied from some governmental publication because they were too intellectual a type of language for me tci use. But, with those changes, I copied my amendment directly from Page 6 of the Manitoba Economic Consul tative Board, and if you will take my amendment, Madaru Speaker - my Sllh-amendment - and look at it, you will find that it says just what this paragraph in the report says. The wording changes a little bit, but most of the words are right there together and the conclusion exactly what they concluded.

I was a little afraid of the words that they used, Madam Speaker, when it says that -- when they said the "onsla ught" of automation -- "preparation should be made for the possi bility of major disloc ations result ing from the ons laught of automation ." I was a little nervous of that word because !t hought it might show where I had found this descr iptive language,

• April 23 rd, 1965 1805 (MR. CAMPBELL cont'd) .... .. . but the fact is that if you will take Page 6 of the report and compare it with my amendment, you will find that almost the exact wording is carried into the amendment and the conclusion is the same. And the conclusion of that committee - and incor porated ih this sub-amendment - is approximately what the Honourable Member for Logan had introduced in the first place . And Madam Speaker, the government turned down this sub-amend ment embodying the very words of what their top-flight econo�ic co:rmhittee has recommended.

Look at the treatment that one of the newspapers of the province gave to this report. Here's practically a full page of the Winnipeg Free Press of April 1st - almost the full page de voted to a resum� of this report, including the part that deals with automation. As a matter of fact, the only other business, I think, except the Economic Consu ltative Board's report, that gets onto this page of the· Free Press is the picture of the Chairman of the Board and one news item dealing with my honourable friend the Member for Gladstone.

With the exception of that, everything on this page is a resum� of this report, including the part that deals with automation and mentions what recommendation has been made. And look at the treatment that the propaganda se ction of the Department of Industry and Commerce gave to it.

I just happen to have several of the pink sheets, every one of which deals with the same report, including the one that deals with automation; and I'm going to read briefly from what this 'propaganda sheet says: "The importance of the role" -- and I'm reading now from an issue of April 2nd, 1965; there are a dozen pages almost here dealing with that report, and I'll read orily one paragraph: "The importance of the role of the Manitoba Economic Consultative Board is underlined by the fact that the eleven senior governments of Canada have recognized the need for consultative or planning action for a number of reasons .

One is the growing complexity of relationships within and between government, labour and management - a sort of cleaning house or neutral ground in which participants are able to assess common futures and define the climates required for adequate growth in economy. And another is to meet the onsla ught of automation which promises to be of sufficient intens ity to require a con sul tative partnership approach involving labour, management and government.

" I included that sentence holus-bolus in my amendment except for the fact that I was just afraid to use such an all-pervasive phrase as "consultative partnership approach" and I just left out the "consulta tive" but put in'partnership approach. " Outs ide of that it's in my sub-amendment completely.

This is the treatment that the government itself gave to the matters that were raised deal ing with automation in this particular report, and when my honourable friend, the Leader of the New Democratic, spoke on this he was rather concerned over the fact that in my sub-amend ment that I, in the "resol ved" part, recommended the es tablishment of a committee represent ing government, labour and management to consider the probable effects of automation and plans to deal effectively with them.

I did that -- I put it that way, Madam Spe aker, and I left out agriculture, which he wondered about, simply because it was copied, word for word, from the report of the Manitoba Economic Consultative Board Report.

And after this Board has given such consid eration to this matter, let me read something directly from the report itsel f, Madam Speaker, not from the articles that emanate from the Department of Industry and Commerce, or not from the full-p age treatment that was recorded to it by one of the Winnipeg papers and perhaps by both - I expect likely the other paper had the same thing but I just didn't happen to lay my hands on it - but let me reaq directly from what the Board says. This is on Page 4: "The Board's Approach".

And this Board, Madam Speaker, points out in its oWn report here, it points out that it is in fact, as far as the Govern ment of Manitoba is concerned, it is comparable to the Economic Council of the Government of Canada, and it pays tribute to the work that the Economic Council has done and that it is following the same line. But here I read from their report on page 4: "The Board's Approach. The examination of the COMEF Report referred to earlier led the Board to conclude that two factors in Mani toba's development deserved its immediate attention.

The first of these was to develop manageable guide lines to manpower training programs appropriate to the emerging require ments of a matu:dng economy. This was seen to entail improved projections of what will be required in terms of education and skills, with particular attention to the probable effects.of automation ." One of the two main things that this top leve l economic committee decided was nece ssa ry . 'And then, skipping aparagraph or two, I go on on Page 5 to the Labour-Ma nagement • Committee·.

"This committee is required to st udy and inves tigate all those matters which, in its·opinion, affect labour-management relations in the broadest sense. This will include an

1806 April 23r d, 1965 (MR. CAMPBELL cont'd) ... .... analysis of the measures taken by other provinces and other countries to promote closer co-operation and to alleviate problems in this field. The Board has found that much more specific information than is now available is required before recom mendations for action can be made. This calls for a substantial program of research. In ad dition to undertaking resea rch into approaches being made elsewhere in Canada and the United States of America, consideration is being given to relevant European experience.

It is the Committee's hope that a basic formula for continuous labour-management consul tation by in dustry groups can be devised and tested. Such. consultation would, in the view of the Board, be invaluable in maximizing the effective utiliz ation of manpower. For instance, it should enable the influence of automation on employment to be jointly assessed beforehand in many cases, thereby clarifying the need for retraining programs to help reduce the problems of displace ment.

" Exactly the thing that we've been talking about, Madam Speaker; and I move now to the next page where I skip a paragraph and read: "A second area" - and this is after dealing with the two things that the Bo'll'd determined were esse ntial for immediate study - "A second area of immediate concern to the Committee is the likely effects of automation on the provincial economy.- It is proposed that a case study be undertaken of the impact of automation on the white collar worker in the coming year, as a first depth study into the effects of automation on manpower in the province .

There is the need also to measure the probable impact of rapid technological advance on agricultural production and farm organization. Th·3 COMEF Report did not provide sufficient clarification in this area, in the view of the Committee, although it attached considerable importance to increased agricultural output.

The Committee proposes a st udy, therefore, on the future of industrialized agriculture in Manitoba's economy in rela tion to reaching desired increases in output and its impact on direct and ancilla ry employment and skill requirements ." Again, exactly the things that those of us who have taken the trouble to discuss this question at all when it's been before the House, have been pointing out as a matter of the greatest importance .

And so, Madam Speaker, I go back to Page 4, and here's the -- after outlining the two things that should be studied immediately and intensively and I don't deal here with the first -- here 1s the wording of the Report: "Second, the ons !aught of automation promises to be of sufficient intensity to require a consultative partnership approach involving labour, manage ment and government. While no one can predict accurately the dimensions of the displace ment of workers through automation, conside rable feeling exists that preparations have· to be made for.the possi bility of major dislo cations . " .

These are the words that I incorporated directly into the sub-amendment and then gave the same conclusion that they did,that they came to, that a committee should be set up . They had left out Agriculture, so I left it out, because here's the resolved part of my sub-amend ment: "Therefore

be it Resolved that this House recommends the es tablishment of a commit tee represent ing government, labour and management, to consider the probable effects of automation and plans to deal effectively with them. " Exactly, and almost word for word, and certainl y identical in conclusion, with what this top level committee of my honourable friends had recommended. And what happens ? The government votes sol idly to turn it down. These, I say, Madam Speaker, are -- I think, Madam, are undoubtedly Manitoba's top economic thinkers and planners. And this group has considered this important question .

They didn't just t!:'eat it casually, lightly and flippantly - like my honourable friends on the other side. They gave it consideration. They said it was one of the two immediate' problems to be tackled, and they tackled it. They've instituted a study, and they came up with a thought on the matter and they made a pronouncement which is contained in here.

And I, to help the government to re cover from the unfortunate position that it had been placed in by my honourable friend's amendment, I incorporate their language and their conclusion into a sub-amendment to allow the government to get this question back into perspective and to accept something that their own top level people have recommended; and that's put into the sub- amendment. And no one on that side says one word about it. Nobody pays any compliments to this top level committee for having dealt with this timely subject.

Nobody says anything to them about the good work that they've been doing in preparing for the onsla ught, as they call it, of automation. Instead of that, with not one word spoken from that side of the House, the government votes sol idly against it. Madam Speaker, are we to conclude that the government has no faith in this top level committee and their conclus ions ? This is the Manitoba Government Economic Council, Madam

l April 23 rd, 1965 1807 (MR. CAMPBELL cont'd) .. .. ... Speaker. Is the government paying no attention to what this board is saying and doing? Because they didn't just leave it at saying, they did something about it. Or is it a fact, what some of us have suspected for some time, that the government has set up so many boards and commissions and studies and inquiries that it loses track of them, and that even the top level ones, such as this, are not listened to, or even read?

But surely you'd think they would be thought of when a matter like this comes up, and surely they wouldn't leave the defence of the government's position to my honourable friend the Member for Ronlin, who sloughs off this important subject with a flippant amendment that pats the government on the back, and then when a chance is given to the government to rehabilitate it self by getting back into the right perspective, by proposing the views and conclusions of their top level group of planners and thinkers, the government votes solidly against it.

Madam Speaker, our rules permit that after one sub-amendment has been disposed of, another can be introduced, and I would suggest to my honourable friends that even at this late date that they rescue themselves from the unfortunate position in which they have been cast, and that one of them move an amendment based on what this committee has recommended. MR. ROBLIN: This is really too good an opportunity to miss.

I really can't resist the opportunity of adding a word to this debate, because we've just listened to one of the most repetitious - well, as usual; my honourable friend has a reputation for being repetitious- but one of the most unusual speeches that I ever expected to hear from him. Because obviously, from what he has said, he has done at least one thing. He's given the imprimatur of his ap proval, at any rate, on the activities of the Manitoba Economic Council . Now what a change that is .

I can recall the - well, the rese rvations; the lack of interest; in fact the real failure to be convinced that these measures that we had introduced respecting the COMEF Report were of any good, that were evidenced by my honourable friend when he spoke . He wouldn't have given you a plugged nickel for all the Manitoba Economic Councils that ever existed or were ever likely to exist. But he thinks he's found a nice little debating point, so he's trotted out and given us this little speech of his this afternoon.

Well, if he approves of the Economic Council, if he likes what they've done, then, of course, he approves the government and the policy of the government that organized that Council and saw that it came into effect. He's paid us the nicest little compliment we've had in many a long day. There's one of our mea sures which he's able to give unqualified approval to.

But he has given a splendid exhibition of the famous art of beating the wind, which is so widely practised in this Legisla ture by members on the opposite side introducing resolutions dealing with things that the government has already dealt with itse lf, and here is a precise ex ample in this case.

When you come to deal with the ques tion of automation, he wants -- (In terjection) -- if you'll just keep quiet and allow me to make my speech -- the noisy Leader of the Opposition will have a chance to get into this later on if he wants, but he should allow me to have my little fun here while I'm on my feet without too many animal noises from the other side of the House. We es tablished the Economic Council. We know what's in the report. We read the re port.

If you read the resolution that is before· the House right now, there is reference to the activities of the various agencies of the government in connection with this matter. Their re port was not overlooked at all. But it illu strates the fatuousness, the fatuousness of my honourable friend the Member for Lake side, bringing in a resolution to approve something that's already being done. And that's what he did. He brought in a resolution to approve something that's already being done. Why bother with that kind of nonsen se? And we've had it on more than one occasion in this particular sessi on of the House.

So I say to my honour able friend that we don't really feel at all disconcerted by the fact that he's able to quote, able to read and quote from the Manitoba Ec onomic Council's Report. We read it too. We know what's in it. Not only that, we have provided them with the means and the staff and the funds to do the very thing that he is approving of and which is included in his resolution.

And why in the name of fate you bring in a reso lution to approve something that the Government has al ready being done, as something that is a contribution on the part of the Opposition to good government in Manitoba -- I just fail to see it, and it's like so many resolutions we 're getting these days dealing with these economic matters. We're a long way ahead of you and that's where we're going to st ay. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question ? MR.

SCHREYER: I think that it was necess ary for the First Minister to get into this de bate if only to distract attention from the fact that this government is plainly embarrassed.

1808 April 23rd, 1965 (MR. SCHREYER coat'd) .... ..•. This Government is plainly embarrassed by what one of its backbenchers did, or pulled off - I think that's the word :... pulled off a few days ago. The First Minister tries to leave the impress ion that the Manitoba Economic Council dates with this government ; tries to teave the impression that economic councils, per se, are an invention of this particula r government, here in Manitoba. I think that when this government here set up the Manitoba Economic Council, it was doing something that other jurisdictions had done months before, 'even years before.

This government was not being particularly bold, daring, or was not showing innovation. It was taking the right step, perhaps, but it was not in the van guard at that time. There's rio causal connection between the Conservative Government of Manitoba and an economic consu ltative commission of one kind or another. The connection is, if anything, casual, and the way this government is treating the recommendations of this com miss ion, I suggest that it is really a casual connection.

If this government was doing all of the things necessa ry to plan for the advent and the growth of automation, the Economic Consu ltative Board's report would not have found it neces sary to make a recommendation therein that a committee be set up, composed of labour, mana gement, etcetera, to look into and plan for the continuation of the growth of automation . The fact is that when you look at Page 4 of the report, the Commission, or Committee, does recom mend the es tablishment of such a committee .

Well, if such was already being done by this Governinent, why would the Committee recommend the est ablishment of such a committee. The fact is that a committee such as is recommended here does not yet exist in this province . Isn't that the fact of the matter? And if it did exist the Committee would not find it necessa ry to recommend the est ablishment of same . However, the government asks one of its members to bring in an amendment to the original reso lution, which has the effect of -- the Member for Lakeside said "s loughing off" the point of the whole resolut ion.

Now I know that over the course of years, the past several decades, there has been mounting concern that Cabinet Government is detracting from the function and purpose of the Leg isla tive Ass embly; and this government here is certainly not doing anything to arrest that trend and the Member for Roblin ce rtainly didn't do anything to help arrest that trend. We had a perfectly good reso lution on the Order Paper. It was one which incorporated the entire gist of the report of this Ec onomic Consult ative Board.

It warranted se rious discuss ion and considera tion, and a member of this Ass embly - not a member of the Cabinet but a member of this Assembly - moves a resolution, an amendment which has watered it down completely, and makes the discussion here entirely meaningless. It's difficult enough for the Legisla tive Assembly to check and supervise the executive - which I unders tand is supposed to be its function - and when other members of the Ass embly not even in the executi ve act as though they are part of the executive, it's really un fortunate.

I would think that if a cabinet minister had moved such an amendment, it could be unders tandable - not something that I would agree with, but understandable. But for an ordi nary member to do that is, I think -- in many ways, he is guilty of not keeping faith with his own responsibilities here in this Chamber. --(Interjecti on) -- The honourable member says "Hog wash" . Those are terms -- I think those are terms with which he has some sort of natural affinity; hog wash.

Madam Speaker, the honourable member -- MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brokenhead has the floor and I think the members should give him the courtesy of listening to him. The Honourable Member for Brokenhead . MR. SCHREYER : Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Honourable Member for Roblin I would have hoped would not take such a dilettantish attitude toward this Assembly, toward the Opposition, and toward the problem of automation, but he has been -- his attitude was dilettantish in all three counts .

We have now, .as a result of his amendment, a resolution here which, applied in the face of facts, has no impact whatsoever. It doesn't call for any thing new; it doesn't call for any exerted study of any kind. It merely thanks this government for its present policies .

It thanks this government for its present policies, vis-a -vis auto mation, at the very same time as the high-priced Economic Consul tative Board is recommend ing the est ablishment of a tangible form of committee to look into the problem of automation based along consu ltation between government, labour and management. , Now the government opposite, members of it opposite, they can twist and turn and squirm all they like. The fact is that they could not yet be doing sufficient work in this area of consu ltative planning when this Committee recommends the est ablishment of this committee .

As I said before, if this government was already and now doing this sort of thing, then this Committee of economists would not have found it nece ssa ry to recommend the est ablishment of

April 23r d, 1965 1809 (MR. SCHREYER cont'd) .. .. ... a committee with representation from government, labour and management. Well Madam Spea.\er, before I sit down, I would like to make this one final point. I don't know on what possible grounds the government can justify voting against a motion which does nothing else but to incorporate the essence , the gist of the recommendations of this report.

If we are getting to the point where we have been having so many committees and studies made that we c� 1t keep track of them, where the government ca n't keep track of it, m:aybe it is time to cut down on the numb er of boards and committees; maybe it's time to set U:p a commit tee to study the studies of committees - I don't know what. But one thing has become clear and also ludicrous too, and that is that this government of the Province of Manitoba has voted against a motion which incorporates the very words of the recommendations of oae of its own agencies.

Madam Speaker, that is ludicrous, to use the word of the Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR. EVANS: . Madam Speaker, would my honourable friend permit me to ask him a question?., Is he aware. that the recommendation that the Consultative Board is making is that they themselves set up a committee of their own organization to ca rry on this study? MR.· SCHREYER: Well yes, Madam Speaker, that's fine, but that was not in conflict with what was originally moved in the motion by the Honourable Member •for Logan nor in the motion of the Honou.rable Member for Lakeside. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question?

MR. MARK G. SMERC HANSKI (Burrows): Madam Speaker, I wish to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from LaVerendrye, that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the. motion ca rried. MADAM. SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Morris. The Honourable the Member for Hamiota. MR. STRICKLAND: Madam Speaker, I adjourned this debate for the Honourable Member for Morris. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable the Member for Morris . . MR. HARRY P.

SHEWMAN (Morris): Ma dam Speaker, with the indulgence of the House I ask,that thisreso lution stand. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate .o n the proposed resolution of the Honourable the. Member for Seven Oaks, and the proposed amendment by the Honourabl e the Member for Wellington. The Honourable the Member for Rhineland. MR. FROESE: Madam Speaker, first of all I would like to thank the membe rs for' naving this matter stood over on .a previous occ asion.

At that time I was awaiting some information and some material in connection with the Medical Plan,. and while I have been so busy on. other :r:p.at�ers I ll,l.J,ven'tbeen able. to c0mpile it properly, but at any rate I would like to make a few comments. this af,ternoon in connection with the resolution .a nd the amendment before us . )n taking a look at. the amendment, which reads, "that this House urges the Government of Canada to ,caU a .Doll1inion:cPr0vincial conference with a. view to estab lishing a Federal Provincial plan of l).ealtlJ. insurance .t hat would be comprehensive, universally availab le and consistent• with the principle; of need, " Madam Speaker, it seems to me that the word "compre hensive!! in, away ·.is 11, .stumbVng b loek, because .of, I think, the

interpretation that has been placed �n ,itf :i;pm tiwe to tiwe. ,�n ch ecking the We bster di�tionary .on this I find that they in clude. such worqs as 'extensive, wide, full, wide scope, inclusive and so on; so that. naturally · in a com prehensive plan that would take in almost -- meet all needs that are• required. by the people Jln<'!�r.�mE!d�caJ \nsurance.;• Wh.ile I'm not opposed to a medical plan that is voluntary, I w;o!lld or>poslfl it,� �. it·"Y� made nJ.agdatory, and the .r esolution as such, or the. amendment as such, .d o.e.sn, 't i?P,e.cify, ,.,so: ,thap, tak:e it for granted that . wh.en the mover co ncludes debate .th at he wUl, inforilJ. tb.e ,rp,embers o� tke House as to what his

interpretation is in this regard. I'ha ye not.ch �cJted the 9,2,,�ecommendations in connection with tne .Roya l-C ommission .a nd. the r.eco:inmen�ations th;:tt· the. government made to thi.s Commission .�t th.at time, 1 think I read them ft;t thaqil�E:J.J;lut): l).aven!trefreshed my me;mory on it, so l will not.com ment on that part : at this., time .. ,A si said, I.believe .in av oluntary plan· such as .the Province of Alberta. has on · theiJ;,.statutes ,and \Vh.iejl, b,a,s ,'proven itself indeed to be a very successful plan, , in operation now for some ti:rne.

Already in the short time that it has been in operation 85 perc. eht .o f the. people,supscribe t,o .one of. a n.umber of plans, to medicalinsurance, .and underJheir set,-up 37 �nsu;ra.nce,,companies are participating. They presently subs idiz,e, under-their plan, som:e

1810 April 23 rd, 1965 (MR. FROESE cont'd) .... .. . 148,000 people and the cost to the government the last year amounted to $2, 341, 000. Of the total people subscr ibing or the contracts in force, 670, 000 of the Albertans insured through the MSI, which is their government insurance plan, so that this is a notable achievement and I feel that they have accomplished something.

I would briefly like to read a statement in connection with their plan as it is set up, and some of the principles that are involved in their particular plan: The Alberta medical plan is a method of providing a comprehensive medical care insurance program for the people of Alberta, that has been worked out by the Alberta Government in col laboration with the profes sion of medicine in the province along with the private enterprise insurance carriers of in surance companies and Medical Services Alberta Incorporated.

It should be noted that since 1946 the Alberta Government has been a partner in an agreement with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta that has under most amicable terms provided comprehensive medical ser vices to those citizens who are in receipt of provincial welfare payments, now upwards of 65, 000 people. Children, widows, aged and blind are receiving excellent professi onal ·ca re.

Over the years, the profess ion has met with the government at such times as they have re quested and worked out contributions that are made to their solely operated fund for disburse ments to their members for services rendered. A similar fund is operated by the Alberta Dental Assoc iation and covers dental care for these people. In the initial discuss ions with the professi on of medicine, a mutual agreement was reached and the principles that were put forward by the government -- and I would like to list them at this point: 1.

The program should be entire ly voluntary and free from any govern ment regimentation or interference with the rights and responsibilities of individuals. 2. That it would preserve inviolate the doctor-patient relationship that we consider nece ssa ry to a high standard of medical care. 3. That it would employ the insurance principle as a means of equalizing the cost of medical services. And 4.

That it would maintain the responsibil ity of the individual in providing for his medical requirements with the state assuming its responsi bility to assist to the extent necessa ry to bring medical services within the financial reach of all the people. A friendly and co-operative. spirit of trust and confidence has marked the many long hours of work and thought of all parties in deve loping this plan.

Under the plan, comprehen si ve medical services are available to -all Albertans through the doctor of their choice and through a carrier of their own sel ection under a government -e stablished maximum allowable premium. Besides providing all comprehensive types of services such as house calls, office visits, hospital care for medical, surgical or obstetrical needs, the benefits include specia lists and consu ltant services when required, and necessa ry laboratory services and diagnostic aids when ordered by a medical practitioner.

There have been additional benefits provided under the Alberta medical plan such as the waiver of premium if a person is disabled because of sickness or accident prior to being 65 years of age. The waiver of premium is for a period of si x months, st arting the third month after disability. There is also non-c ancellability of policy except for the cons tant misuse or non-payment of premium.

The government subs idy is provided to Alberta res idents, people who have resided for at least 12 months out of the previous 24 in Alberta and who have had no taxable income in the preceding calendar year or whose taxable income during that period was not over $5 00. 00. The subs idy paid by the government towards the premium cost for those individuals with no taxable income is : a single individual, $1 8. 00 per year; a married couple with no dependents, $42.0 0 per year; a family of three or more, $72. 00 per )'ear. For those with taxable income up to $500. 00 this subs idy is one-half of the above.

The insur ance companies, besides being able to provide the comprehensive type of medical benefits on the first dollar coverage, also have available for those who are not being subs idized by the government a type of policy with a deductible amount and a eo-insurance principle in which the premium may be consi derably less than that of first dollar coverage premium. Insurance companies are also able to offer endorsements to the policies that pro vide additional health benefits, such as special nursing services, contributions toward the cost of prescrip tion drugs, ambulance services, optometric services, etc.

The M3dical Services Alberta Incorporated policies, of course, only provide for the payment of physicia n's services. This is a brief outline of the plan and from all reports it is working out very well and the people are taking advantage of it. Earlier I mentioned the number of people that are being subs idized through the plan. In addition , the outline mentions some 65, 00 0 people, such as children, widows, aged and blind

April 23 rd, 1965. 1811 (MR. FROESE cont'd) ....•.. who are receiving help from the government, are also brought under this plan, and the number has increased to 68, 000 from the original 65, 000. The rates, when checked with out present rates of the MMS, are quite favourable, be cause I checked with our MMS here in Manitoba and their non-group sin gle rate is $1 6. 95 on a quarterly basis, which on a yearly basis would be .$6 7. 80, and the family rate is $40, 05 or, on a yearly basis , $1 59. 80.

In Alberta they're subsidizing these amounts by one-half, and their contributions on a one person a year is $18. 00; on two persons, $42. 00; and on a family of three or more it is $72. 00 a year; so that -- $72.0 0, if you multiply it by two it would mean that they pay $144.00 for a similar plan. Then, as already mentioned, those that have a taxable income be low the $50 0. 00, they still get some subsidy, and these are $9.0 0 for one person, a single person; $2 1. 00 for two persons; and for a family of three , $36.0 0.

So that the government is helping those people that are in need of assis tance, and I think we could well do with a similar plan. · Now the reso lution before us calls on the Federal Government to call a conference, and I wonder whether we shouldn't take the initiative ourselves rather than calling on the Dominion Government, to have a committee .of our own and to look into this matter as a provincial plan and follow what -- on the lines of what Alberta is offering to their citizens. !w ill not oppose the amendment before us, but I would at the same time also rese rve my decision when the mover closes the debate, that I would only support it on the basis that it be a volun tary plan., I don't think the compuls ory plans are operating as well, and I think they are more costl y .

MR. ARTHUR E. WRIGHT (Seven Oaks): Would the member permit a question ? The per capita rate in Saskatchewan is $2 1. 0 0 and compt rable service in Alberta. is $4L 00. Could the honourable member explain that please ? , MR. .· FROESE: Madam Speaker, I don't know the Saskatchewan plan th::ti well. I'd hav\3 to check whether the same services are provided. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. ROBLIN: Madam Speaker, may we have a recorded vote on this motion; please ? MADAM SPEAKER: Call in the members.

The quest ion before the House, the proposed motion in amendment thereto by the Honourable Merilber for Wellington. A st anding vote was taken, the result being as follows: YEAS: Messi's: Alexander, Baizley, Barkman, Beard, Bilton, Bjornson, Campbell, Carroll, Cowan, Desj ardins, Evans, Froese, Groves, Guttormson, Hamilton , Harrison, Hillhouse, Jeannotte, Johnson, Klym, Lissam an, Lyon, McDonald, McGregor, Mills, Moeller, Molgat, Patrick, Roblin, Seaborn, Shewman, Shoemaker, Smellie, Smercbanski, Stanes, Steinkopf, Strickland, Tanchak, Vielfaure, Weir, Witney, and. Mrs. Morrison.

NAYS : Messrs: Cherniack, Gray, Harris, Paulley, Schreyer, and Wright. MR. CL ERK: Yeas, 42; Nays, 6. , MADAM SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried . . . . . • Continued on next page

18 12 April 23rd, 1965 MADAM SPEAKER : The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution as amended by the Honourable the Member for Seven Oaks . Are you ready for the question? MR. ARTHUR E. wRIGHT (S even Oaks): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Brokenhead, that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER : The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member fo'r Elmwood . The Honourable the Member for Selkirk . lVIR.

HI LLHOUSE: Madam, at the outset I would like to - - (I nterjection) -- quote? -- (I nterje ction) -N o, not this time. Although I thirik, Madam, this resolution has been de bated so often in this House that I think that all the members who have spoken have spoken on numerous other occa sions and I think perhaps it would facilitate matters if we simply referred · to the volume of Hansard in which our other speeches could be found when they. could be read by the members at leisure.

But since that procedure was not followed by the mover of the re solution and by the Honourable Member for Hamiota, who have both spoken already, I feel it incumbent upon -me to say a few words. At the outset, Madam, I would like to. express to both honourable gentlemen who have spoken my congratulations on the excellence of their respective presentations. The Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, who bappens to be my member in this House, was acting as a pinch hitter for the Honourable Member for Elmwood and I think he did an excellent job.

I think both honourable members spoke without emotion and placed their respective stands squarely before us. Now, Madam, I think that we would be only justified in this House in adopting a form of compulsory automobile insurance if it were necessary and I don't think that such a form of insurance is necessary in this province . Because after all, I think that this House, at least the primary duty of this House in respect of highway accidents, should be to avoid them .

I think too, Madam, that as far as the unfortunate victims of automobile accidents are concerned, that they are adequately protected inManitoba at present. I don't think that any case can be ma de by comparing the rates chargeable in Saskatchewan to the rates chargeable in Manitoba for similar coverage. I don't think these rates can be compared beca use they are dealing with entirely different subj ect matters.

I have before me Saskatchewan's Automobile Acc ident In surance Act, and explanation of it, which was revised in 1960 and is issued by the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Office -- and if there 's any doubt in any membe r's mind as to the futility of coiTiparing rates, I think Page 17 of this little volume will show that even the Saskatchewan Governm-ent Insurance Office openly admits that no comparison of rates can be made. It reads, Madam, "The premiiun rates set by the Government Insurance Office are determined by Sas katchewan's exp�rience .

Since road and traffic conditions as well as driving habits vary from province to province as between state and state, etc. , it must not be assumed that even under exactly the same plan set up elsewhere premiums would be the same. " Now, that's a frank acknowledgement by the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Office that premium rates are fixed by the rate of acc idents in the province to which they apply and they are determined by the conditions prevailing in that particular province .

So I don't think anything can be gained by us in saying that under the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Plan a 1960 Ford of such-a nd such a cylinder of horsepower can be insured for so much money and that in Manitoba it costs perhaps an additional sum . I don't think anything can be gained by. that at all beca use as far as insurance rate s are concerned, they vary between city and city in Manitoba, they vary between province and province in Canada, and these rate s are all fixed on the basis of the premium rate ratio loss exisfing in that particular province .

So therefore Madam, I think that the only way that we can deal with this particular matter is to determine whether or no the Saskatchewan Government insurance policy on an au tomobile is as good as the ordinary automobile insurance policy issued in Manitoba. And I submit Madam, that such a policy is not. And I would like to give certain examples and raise certain points re garding the Saskatchewan Government automobile insurance.

Now in Saskatchewan, an automo bile policy issued by the Saskatchewan Government carries a $200 deductible clause on property damage, collision or upset, fire theft and miscellaneous perils, consisting of lightning, wind storm, hail, flood, riot, falling aircraft, earthquake, etc. , The standard automobile policy issued by a company in Manitoba, under our law contains no such deduction . As a matter of fact, it is illegal in Manitoba for an insurance company to make a deduction of any amount in re spect of third party liability. It's true that they can make a deduction in respect of collision or

April 23rd, 1965 181 3 (MR . HILLHOUSE cont'

d) in respect of comprehensive insurance insofar as it applies to glass but that is a deduction which is chosen by the person who is purchasing the insurance. But in Manitoba, as I Sf).y, the thi:t;-d party liability insurance cannot be issued by a company. in Manitoba with a deductible amount. So the situation is this, that in Saskatchewan if two cars are involved in an acc ident and they're covered only by the Saskatc.hewan Government insurance policy, and the damage to each of these cars is in excess of $200, each owner has to. pay that first $200 himself.

AI;td that is something worthy of taking into consideration when you staxt to compare the cost of autom obile insurance in Manitoba with automobile insurance in Saskat- chewan. _ . . _N ow there's one thlng, I think too,., that I should mention, and that is.t his. Property damage claims make up abo�t, 92- percent of the volume of automobile liability claims paid in Ca nada.

Now if we take the year 1959, the average auto accident claim in .Manitoba was $237 and ifin_ Manitoqa at that time the $200 dedU(;tible did apply to policies issued by private com panies in Manitoba, it would ta:ve meant an additional cost .of $200 to each individual in Mani toba whether he was insured .or not. Now that is worthy of consideration. Beqause in Saskat chewan the driver, if his loss was $23 7, he would have to pay the first $200 himself and the governmentwo uld only pay. the $37 .0 0.

Now that is the reason why in Saskatchewanthey have what is knoWn as a package policy; which is an additional coverage issued by the_ Government Insur_ance Office to ma,ke up the defic.its in its original compulsory insurance . • The H�noura ble ¥ember for Hamiota has dealt with the question of rates prevailing in Manitoba and in Saskatchewan for the same type of coverage, and I think he has. used the cities of Regina and Winnipeg by way of comparison. But I don't intend to deal_ with that.

But ! would like to mention, Madam, that in Saskatchewan the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Office does not give any consideration to a person who buys a car in the summer or_in the fall. Be ca use all Saskatchewan Gove rnment insurance runs from April 1st to March 31 st and if you buy or license a car in Saskatchewan in December you have to pay the full insurance coverage, notwithstanding the fact that your policy expires March 31 st.

Now anothe;r thing, in Saskat-: chewan, ln the license field, which is all part of the cost of operating a car, there's no differ ence prevailing between the various places in Saskatchewan as there is in Manitoba. In Mani toba, in the City of Winnipeg you have a higher rate than you have say in Arborg - where the Honourable Minister of Educf).tion is aiways referring to -

whereas in Saskatchewan there's no difference of rates prevailing. Ndr is there any difference in rates prevailing - the basic rates in Saskatchewan are all determined by wheel base; they're not determined by horsepower or anything else, Now there's another point that I'd like to raise and that is this.

In Saskatchewan the Sask atchewan Government insurance policy - that is the one issued by the Saskatchewan Government - is, to a certain extent, subsidized by private insurer, for this reason: Th4t if I as a resident Saskatchewan, I am forced to take out my government insurance and if I take out insurance with a private �ompany to complement or to supplement that government insurance and I am involved in an accident, and supposing I have a judgment given against me for say $10, 000 for _physical injuries caused to some other party, under the law in Saskatchewan, which is unique, the private inslJrer in that particular case would have to exhaust his liability under that policy be fore the Saskatchewan Government would be called upon to pay a cent.

So to that extent, Madam Speaker, the Saskatchewan Government Insurance Office is subsidized by the private insurer. I 'think, Madam, that as far as we're concerned, our main interest in Manitoba should be in highway safety and I believe that our law in Manitoba is about the best law in the North American continent, ,to ensure . highway safety. It is a law which has been examined and studied by every state in United_ States.

It has been adopted by approximately 40 states in United States: It has even been studied by France and it has also been studied by Great Britain, where automobile immrance has been compulsory since the advent of the motor car. And in each one of these jurisdictions it has been found that the Manitoba system of safety respon sibility, a�signed'r iskplan aU:d unsatisfied judgment plan, are the best means of ensuring to the public compensation for injuries sustained. And in addition to that, they are the best means of ensuring the greatest possible degree of safety on our highways.

Beca use under our ·MimitO])a system, the obj ect is to keep off the highway any driver who is prone to acci dent or who is considered to be a menace to the publ ic. I;f we had compulsory automobile insurance tomorrow, there. is nothing which would guarantee to us any greater degree of highway safety than we have now. And as a matter of fact, our highway safety would not be of such a high degree if we deleted from our system in

181 4 April 23rd, 1965 (MR. HILLHOUSE cont'd) .... Manitoba the financial responsi bility portion of our law and the highway safety portion of our law, because if a man only had to produce a polic y of insur ance in order to get a licence and there was no other conditions attached to his driving as we have in Manitoba today, we would not ensure to the people of Manitoba that degree of safety which we are gradually attaining.

I think too, Madam, that there's no need for us to embark on a system of compulsory in surance by reason of the fact that even before the impost of that $25 fee for an unlicensed dri ver, even before that time, I think that about 97 percent of the automobile drivers of Manitoba were insured. And that being so, why would it be necessa ry to bring into Manitoba a system of compulsory insurance which has been a failure in all those other ju rsidiction where it has been tried. For these reasons, Madam, I do not intend to support the resolution. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Inks ter, that the debate be adjourned. . MADAM SPEAKER presen ted the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Virden. The Honourable the Member for Arthur. MR. DONALD E . McGREGOR (Virden) : Madam Speaker, the Honourable Member from Arthur adjourned the debate on my behalf. I am now prepared to close the debate, but should anyone wish to speak .... MADAM SPEAKER: Is there any other member wishing to speak ?

The Honourable Mem ber for Carillon. MR. BARKMAN: Madam Speaker, I have very little to add, except to get up and support this resolution. I wholeheartedly agree with the Member of Virden that it is high time that a bill or a resolution of this type is passed here in this House and I hope will be enacted in Ottawa immediately or as soon as possi ble . I see a great advantage, not only to the labour force but also to the farmer. I have received quite a few phone calls and I was very pleasa ntly surprised at the support shown in regards to this resolution.

We have quite a few farmers down there with pos sibly 100 or 200 acres in the line of spec ial crops or row crops · such as beets, cropping such as beets, onions and the like and they have quite a time getting some help at certain times of the year and I certainly think that this resol ution will help them in this respect. I also see a great advantage to the labour force, espec ially in rural Manitoba, or in rural areas, because of the se asonal situation that we have on the farms.

Very often this season is also the lull of a rural busin ess and I'm sure that if we can help the farmer and in return it will help also that labour can be used - soma of the labour is not used in the busin esses of rural Manitoba can help out part time on the farms - and some of these fellows are quite willing to do this . I'm talking possi bly more of not permanent help, but some of the temporary help. I'm sure that if we can help the farm labour situation in this manner this would be advantageous to us as bus iness � people and the farmer both.

So with the many points that have already been talked about from different members in this House I just thought I wanted to get up and support this resolution. I think it's important because I feel that it will help labour, help the farmer, and even help the busin esses. MADAM SPEAKER: Any member wishing to speak? The Honourable the Member for Virden. MR. McGREGOR: Madam Speaker, ft's a real pleasure in having the privilege to intro duce a resolution. While I used very few words to introduce it I'll assure you I'll use less to close it. However, I would like to thank every member and every Party.

I think it's something that I've never witnessed, · but possi bly it has happened many times before when a resolution being introduced from a backbencher and the three following speakers represented three differ ent parties and all three expressed complete support. I don't know if this happens very often .. I would sometimes like to think it should happen more often because the backbenchers I think still can play quite an important

part in our government affairs. I would like to thank every one of them. They've certainly brought points out, whether it would be the Member from Rhineland and his facts and figures; or the Honourable Member for LaVe rendrye who brought another slightly different approach; or even the Honourable Member from Gladstone who was questioning me on the dollar bill. Well I'll assure him being of Scotch des cent the dollar bill involved was my dollar bill but I think in the long run it'll be paid back many times over. But I think I go along with the honourable member who just spoke. I think the

April 23rd, 1965 1815 (MR. McGREG OR cont'

d) most encouraging point was the ones that I have received from the c.onstituents - not my constituents - but constituents throughout Manitoba and I've never received one inopposition to it. While there was some in the early stages before the resolution was introduced - and I was looking for these to find out if I was on the right ground myself - but since then I was at a meeting Tuesday of this week in the western part of Manitoba - this. was not a provincial political meeting - and there was definite expression there of support all the way across.

I'm quite sure as .cruising around the hallways this resolution now will get a very strong support and I do feel that if it comes out of here with a fairly unanimous decision that Ottawa will look at it. I know that they are looking at the weaknesses of The Unemployment Insurance Commission as a whole and I'm .sure that they will see fit, regardless what political party is in power in Ottawa, will see fit to implement a resolution along these lines. Thank you, Madam Speaker. MR . SCHREYER: Madam Speaker ,I would like to ask the honourable sponsor of the resolution a question.

I'm not sure if he's in a position to answer. I would ask him what in his opinion, what seems to be the greatest single obstacle or opposition to your resolution or to the idea of unemployment insurance for farm workers . MR . McGRE GOR : Would the honourable member repeat that ? I ju st didn't catch his point. MR . SCHREYER : Yes, Madam Speaker, I'm asking the honourable member to tell me what is, in his opinion, the greatest obstacle or the greatest single opposition to unemploy ment insurance for farm workers. I mean it's been years and years and it's taken . so long. What 's the main opposition to it?

Does he have any information on that ? MR. McGREGOR : Madam Speaker, in speaking to some of the people who officiatethe Unemployment Insurance, they see quite a problem in trying to go around and see that Joe Blow is putting the right stamps in for his particular employee, is one of the ones; and 1 think the general farmers, some of them realize that it's going to be a nuisance for them .

But I've taken the thought that the farmer who's really going ahead today has got to be a bookeeper and he's got to have everything down, so I really don't see too much - while some express this opposition in this regard, I really don't think it's really just ified if they think of it in its true sense. I'm not sure if I've got the question or not, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried.

MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for LaVerendrye and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable Member for Springfield and the proposed sub-amend ment by the Honourable the Member for Gladstone. The Honourable the Member for St. George . MR. GUTTORMSON: I adjourned the debate for the Member for LaVerendrye. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable the Member for LaVerendrye. MR . ALBERT VIELFAURE (LaVerendrye): Madam S peaker, I beg leave of the House to have this matter stand please. I was away on Wednesday and I' m not ready to speak now.

MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Wellington. The Honourable the Member for Selkir.k. MR . HILLHOUSE : Madam Speaker, I crave the indulgence of the House and ask that this ma tter be allowed to stand. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable Member for Selkirk and the proposed amendment thereto by the Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. The Honourable the Member for Wellington. MR .

RIC HARD SEABORN (Wellington): Madam Speaker, I thought that I would like to ma ke a c �ntribution to this debate beca use I have been in the union ever since I was 15 years old and the association with whom I am associated is perhaps one of the most influential and powerful in the world.

There is unfortunately a misunderstanding of what unionism represents among many people and one of the most difficult tasks that my union faces at any rate, is creating a proper image in the community; and to do this Local 190 has for many years under taken many worthwhile projects such as providing services of musicians for charitable pur poses paid out of the union treasury. But despite these most sincere efforts I'm afraid that the element of misunderstanding still exists in many are as.

This is most unfortunate beca use the association of workers, and this must be admitted, has contribute d greatly to the present working conditions under which many employees labour. It has also been demonstrated, I be lieve, that the full co-o peration of both labour and management has done much to create our very healthy economic and social development. And while there may be those who regret the

18 16 April 23r d, 1965 (MR . SEA BORN cont'd) .... imposition of a government-supervised strike vote, I think I under stand the reasons for it. Many unions are of such power and influence that a strike could well paralyze the whole communitY.. and the public do fear the economic repercussions that could follow an ill-a dvised strike action. And I think this is understandable aithough I must at once repeat that I personally feel that our local representatives in the labour field are upright and responsible individuals.

In fact we are planning that more and more of these representatives are sitting down with management to iron out many of their difficulties and we have been par ticularly blessed with labour peace in this area. We cer tainly have come a long way from the days when each party regarded each other as a deadly enemy and battled out each issue, quite literally, in an era of the deepest hostility, but 1 am afraid - and I do speak as a union man here - there are those who are not too familiar with the labour scene and still mistrust us despite our best efforts.

So we have two sides to this controversial issue and I appreciate and respect both points of view. It is comparatively easy to gain some popular,ityby stressing one side of the argu ment without considering the other and I for one would not like to do this al this time. I have perhaps expressed my views rather poorly, but I feel it would be presumptious on my part to support this resolution which I must admit removes a part of our Iabolir legislation which irri tates the labour movement.

Maybe we should do this, l don't know, but I would much prefer to hear what the Woods Comm ittee has to say, not mi.ly in this particular matter, but in the whole field of labour legis lation. It is my understanding that the Woods Comm ittee was not an imposed Board of Inquiry but exists and functions by the whole consent of all those concerned with it.

I appreciate that I may be leavi.ng myself open to being accused of delaying tactics and probably a lack of support for the great labour movement of which I am' proud to be a member, but I am just as anxious for my own particular association to gain the full respect and understanding that it deserves as others perhaps would like to have for their organization.

So I'm not without my prejudices therefore, and I would much prefer to have a neutral body render its opinions before I make a decision on this matter -- and here I mi ght say that while I really do not champion the Minister, I'm sure he was motivated very much by the same thoughts that I have expressed here.

On looking over the personnel of the Woods Committee, and particularly the chairman himself, -I am persuaded that in this instance there is a sincere and honest desire to seek out the truth in the labour field and I feel there are ample reasons to withhold a final decision on this re solution in regard to the supervised strike vote until we hear the results of this investiga tion left in the capable hands of this committee . Thank you. MADAM SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question. The Honourable the Member from Logan. MR.

LEMUEL HARRIS (Logan): I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Seven Oa ks that the debate be adjourned. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice Vote declared the motion carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The adjourned debate on the proposed resolution of the Honourable the Member for Portage la Prairie. The Honourable the Leader of the New Democratic Party. MR.

PAULLEY: Madam Speaker, we have before us a very interesting resolution as proposed by the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie dealing with the question of joint study �md resear-ch by representatives of labour and managem ent. --I think it \volild be proper for me to say at the offset of my remarks that labour and management more and more are _ com ing to the· conClusion that they have _common problems in many areas and that there could well be, particularly in the field of legislation, areas where a joint coimriittee could consider the effects of legislation and the respective fields of both management ar{d labour in industry and prior to any conflict taking place, might be _ able to remove through prior colisllltation'and co -operation, _areas of possible conflict.

This I suggest, Madam Speaker, is going on more _and more, not only here in Manitoba and Canada . but 'in most of the industdalized nations of the world� So I say that it is good, and I can sup port in general· the resolution -as proposed by the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie.

In having said that however, Maqaill Speaker, the resolutio!l that is proposed by the honourable member is ce-rtainly in conflict with his remarks on intrOducing the resolution to this House because, Madam Speaker, if you \vould take a look at page 1540 of the Hansard of April 13 th; at the commen cement of the introduction of this resolution, the Honourable Mem ber for Portage la Prairie had this to say, on introducing the debate. "So the resolution

April 23rd, 1965 1817 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) < .... requests a Labour Management Committee be set up, that' is, an official committee appointed by this House, not an ad hoc committee or a private committee set up at the whim of a Minister .

We are asking for an official committee of this House to set up-joint study management labour relations ." The honourable member then goes on to say: ''Now, although the Honourable Minister of Lab our when he was requesting his members not to speak to a previous resolution dea ling with labour relations, he gave us the impress ion, I thought, that everything was quite well in hand in the matter of labour relations, in the matter of labour-management relati:ons, that he was as much as asking members of this House to keep their hands off and let this committee proceed at its own pace and to make a report to him whenever they have something to report, then the Minister himself, in his own good time and in his own good judgment would make recommendations to this House or otherwise, if he so desired.

" I point this out, Madam Speaker, to show that there is an apparent conflict between the presentation of the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie and the resolution itself, be cause, Madam Speaker , when the honourable member was speaking he said that a committee should be set up, an official committee of this House , which is one thing. The resolution that we are considering at the present time in the resolved portion says : "Therefore

be it resolved that the Government of Manitoba give conside ration to the establi shment of such a joint Management-Labour Resea rch Committee with such research assi stance as may be provided by Manitoba or by the University of Manitoba for the purpose of achieving certain conditions or certain reports.

Now I want to say, and repeat, Madam Spe aker, that I don't think really that a committee set up within the House itself could achieve the desired -b asically I would suggest that if it were . to be a committee of the House it would be rather difficult for members to give the length of time which should be given in consideration of this important matter. Secondly, that there would have to be broad delegations of functions to some research committee or the UniverSity of Manitoba or some other body.

Now we have heard a lot, Madam Speaker, about the Woods Commission which is at the present time considering matters respecting labour -management relations, matter of a sur vey of possi ble recommendations for changes in our labour le gislation. The other day, Madam Speaker; in another debate Ir ead into the record the pos ition that labour is taking in respect to the Woods-Commission.

If I recall correctly, among other phrases was the phrase that labour went into that jo int committee with its eye open, but certainly not with any intention, or even inde ed, Madam Speaker, with any thought, that the government would use the fact of the Dean Woods. Committee as an excuse for them to deter or defer legis lation which is con cerned insofar as industrial activity is concerned.

I might say, Madam Speaker, the Honourable Member for Wellington just this afternoon while dealing in another debate, suggested this again to the government that they should await until the Wood Commissi on had finalized its consideration. But, Madam Speaker; may I say to the members of this House that there is no final period of time in whic h the Woods Com- miss ion is-obligated to· make a report .to the Minister.

There is no directive given through any res olution of this House to the Minister that on receipt of the findings of the Woods Commis sion that caction.shduld be taken as a result of the deliberations or findings .of the Woods Com mission. Indeed, Madam.Speaker, there's no suggestion at all that we members of this House, who are I am sure, all concerned with labour legislation and management legisla tion as well, there ,is no provision at all whereby we will receive. any indica tion of the report except by sufferance oLthe administration or in particular the Minister of La bour.

I appreciate, Madam Speaker, that we have had an interim; report from . the commission, the Blake Commiss ion that is, as a result of the Minister of Labour desiring to reveal to us what is -transpiring and I- say to tlie Minister of La bour that this is appreciated. But again I say, Madam-speaker, that there.is no -obligation placed upon the government to keep the House informed-as to what the Bl'ake C.oinmiss ion is doing.

May I repeat once again - and I repeat this particularly for the Honourable Member for Wellington who just spoke respecting the secret-. strike vote there.is, no tlirective whatsoever, of a termination of deliberations of the Wood. Commission.

So lw ould suggest, Madam Speaker, there' s re ally no point in any mem ber of the government or any-member of the House, no matter where he or she may sit, -to just simply turn arolmd and say: well now we 're not going to deal with a matter of this nature until it has ·been_ considered by the Woods Committee, because we don't know as I say - and I'm in this being.-repetitious -w e don't know when or even if, the Woods Commiss ion is

18 18 April 23rd, 1965 (MR . PAULLEY cont'd) .... obligated to make a report to us in this House . A little later, Madam Speaker, I intend to come back to this point. But I want to say that many of the suggestions contained in this res olution are proper. I make one or two observations in the resolution of the Honourable . Member for Portage la Prairie . In the first "whereas" my honourable friend says that one of the objectives that we should have is to create and maintain an attitude which will be conducive to the retention of present industry.

May I suggest, Madam Speaker, that while I am sure that the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie was thinking of industry that conducts itself on a fair and equitable basis insofar as its employees are concerned, that there are other present industries in the Proyince of Manitoba that do not, have not, and are continuing not to, conduct their present industrie s in an_area which we in this House should think is desirable and should continue.

I'm sure I don't have to say to the Honourable the Minister of Labour that as a result of a magistrate's court hearing and a county court hearing, that the attitude and policies of one Brown Steel of Brandon would be the type of an industry that we would be desirous of retain- ing in Manitoba, if it continued the alleged infractions of what we in this House consider proper labour legisla tion.

So I say to my honourable friend the Member for Portage la Prairie, I'm sure that when he is talking in his res olution of present industry, he 's really talking about those industries presen tly in Manitoba which are conducting thems elves in a fair and reason able manner with their employees.

And because of this, Madam Speaker, I suggest to the Honourable Minister of Labour that if we 're going to have to await, without any termination period as concerned, recommendations first of all coming from the commissi on to the Minister, then through the Minister to us, the interim period gives to industries of this nature an incen tive to continue. But more important, I think, or equally important with that, Madam Speaker, it gives to those other employers or some other employers, a basis on which to operate in the same matter as Brown Steel .

So I say, Madam Speaker, the Minister of Labour should be fully conversant with the deficiencies in our labour legisla tion which caused a rejection of the appeal of the Department of Labour in the case that I'm talking of. And surely, surely Madam Speaker, the Minister of Labour or the government should not defer neces sary action in order to make sure that there can be no repetition as to the situation that I have just referred to. The resolution, Madam Speaker, also suggests that one of the purposes of a committee set up would be to achieve a sound and harmonious relationsh ip between management and labour.

I think, Madam Speaker, that the illustration that I have just used would tie in with the senti ment as expressed by the Member for Portage la Prairie .

Then in his (b) , on his reso lved and again I'v e used an example of Brown Steel - "The creation and maintenance of an atmosphere conducive to the retention of present industry in Manitoba and to the encouragement of new in dustries to establish here ." I'm sure, Madam Speaker, that there's no question of doubt that the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce, and every other member in this House, are most anxious, most anxious that we have here established in Manitoba new industrie s. There 's no question of doubt about this. But I pose this question to the administi ation.

Does the Government of Mani toba want any new industry to locate in Manitoba which may be the type of industry that might take the advantage of the present loopholes in our labour laws, which again led to the situation of Brown Steel. I think not, .Madam Speaker. I have more confidence in the Minister of Labour than to think that he would be a party to joining in attracting new industries into Manitoba.

But we won't know what type of management they might be, Madam Speaker, until after th ey'v e located; and it can conceivably be that some industries may have followed the Brandon case and endeavour to come into Manitoba on that basis . So I suggest, this is another-reason why there should be no deferment in patching the loopholes in the legisl ation we have at the pres ent time . Clause (

e) of the resolution of the Member for Portage la Prairie says, one of the ob je ctives of the establishmen t of such a joint labour-ma nagement resea rch committee would be to establish, maintain and perpetuate such procedures and relationsh ip as will be conducive to free collective bargaining. I ask my honourable friend the Minister.' of Labour, is the present legisla tion _in Manitoba of the type· that does assure free colle ctive bargaining? My honourable friend nods his head that he thinks that our present legisla tion is .that type of legisl ation that is conducive to free collective bargaining.

Then I ask my honour.able friend if this is the case, why was the Brown Steel case ih Bra ndon lost ? I ask my honourable friend, the Minister of Labour, is he by the nodding in a sense, of his head, suggesting that those employees .at Brown Steel who attempted to become members of an organization, covered under the legisla tion

April 23rd, 1965 1819 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) ..... which is conducive to free collective bargaining ? Seriously, I say to my friend the Minister of Labour, look over even those portions of the Order for Return that I got that the government accepted and he will see even in them that it is not true here in Manitoba that there is free collective bargaining to the degree that we should have . And I say to my honourable friend, let's face up to it and let us not attempt to use any committee such as the Woods Commi ttee as a lever to defer needed legisla tion in the Province of Manitoba.

I'm sure the Honourable Minister of Labour, Madam Speaker, has had drawn to his atten tion -a s indeed I have and I'm sure other members of this House have as well -- ma ny instances where employees have attempted to band themselves into a trade union organization only to find that the activities of the management were able to exercise a greater pressure on the em ployees, with the net result that the trade union did not become certified in some of these plants .

I would like the Honourable the Minister of Labour to assure me, and through me and this House, to every employee in the Province of Manitoba that they are guaranteed the right of free collective bargaining and agreement. I woUld like my honourable friend to say to me that under the pres ent legisla tion in Manitoba, that no employee in industry - and by indusfry I mean the broad field - is or can be deprived of their rights to free bargaining. I say to my honourable friend, please tell us if this is the case.

I ask my honourable friend, are we so wrong; are the individuals who have attempted to join in organizations wrong when their efforts have been thwarted in some instances by management ? When I say this, Madam Speaker, I want it to be clear that I am not attacking industry in general and by and large the employers in the Province of Manitoba are good employers.

But there are the odd few - possi bly all too many, Madam Speaker who are not - and this is the reason, on behalf of the employees who may be in these industries where the management is not playing the game, shall I say, that it is neces sary for government to step in. ·And coming as these few remarks of mine do on the heels of a revelation such as that of Brown Steel in Manitoba, I appeal to the Honourable the Minister of Labour, don't wait on any commission. You know the situation. You know what is requred to plug at least that loophole .

Why not "do it now ", as the well know phrase dealing with unemploy ment situations we hear so much. ·A nother point in the resolution of the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie, and this is (e), or (d) "To disc ourage all legisla tion that will be res trictive in nature, and to devise ways and means of promoting and encour aging greater industr ializ ation in Manitoba.

" Again I say on these points, Madam Speaker, we want industry, we want good employers and if we can't have industry with good employers, Madam Speaker, then I say we must have good legisla tion that will force, if that is the proper word, bad employers to be come good em ployers. This. is what's required in Manitoba today and I suggest deferment is not the answer particularly in tho se cases that the Minister is so well aware of.

I appreciate, Madam Speaker, that the government may take the viewpoint as it did in respect of the resolution on automation that because some sort of a committee is working in the field that they shoUld reject the proposition of the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie, and because of the interesting debate that we had today, Madam Speaker, on automation, I ask the government please do not take the same approach to this question as you did to that.

I say to the government please do not take the fact that the Woods Commission is now functioning as an excuse to reject the res olution that has been proposed by the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. Because, Madam Speaker, if the Minister of Labour and the administration want the Woods Commission to continue they can accept the principle of this and that commis si on coupled with additional rese arch at the Universi ty or whatever is required, can form the basis of the objectives that I'm speaking of and I'm sure in general were the objectives of the Hon ourable the Member for Portage la Prairie.

But, Madam Speaker, I don't think really that the resol ution as proposed by the Member for Portage la Prairie covers the situation to the degree that would find full sati sfaction as far as I am concerned, and I want to propose a few amendments to the resolution. Among the amendments that I am about to propose, Madam Speaker, is one that a committee of joint labour-management which woUld be set up, would be a continuing committee.

Because I don't think, Madam Speaker, that with the changing picture in in dustry, and the problems of industry, that we shoUld si mply set up a committee that make a report at some future date and sort of go out of existence. I think the time has come in the Province of Manitoba, and in the development of our province, where it's necess ary or advis able to have a continuing committee, more or less experts in the field of labour management relations or jointly with them, surveying from time to time the problems that arise.

1820 April 23rd, 1965 (MR. PAULLEY cont'd) ....... .. . I appreciat�J very much, Madam Speaker, that the Honourable the .Minister of Labour can say to me, well 1 have experts within my department; we can call on the University to give us some t;�uggestions; but the type of committee envisioned in this resolution would be one of labour and management primarily, or initially divorced from government.

Another suggestion! wish to lay before the House for its consideration in addition to the .co mmittee being a continuing one, is that the government pending receipts of reports from S\lCh a committee make such amendments to present legislation or introduce such new legis., lation as from time to tim� may be desirable by parties concerned. In other words, I'm recom me nding to the government that they do not hide behind a committee of this type and say we await their report.

And a third principle in the amendment which I am about to propose, Madam Speaker, wquld be one whereby in a committee set up like this, would make from time to time reports as to its findings and deliberations to the Minister or to the government and following that, that. a report on the .findings and the deliberations of a committee set up would be forwarded or laid on the table in this Legislature at it's next session.

I think it's important, Madam Speaker, that we do have a continuing committee which will from time to time report to government; that the government itself do not use the estab lishment of such a commi ttee as an avenue to prevent it from introducing desirable legislation of parties conce rned. I do think, Madam Speaker, that it is necessary that such a committee or the government make available to all members of this House, what is going on in the com mi ttee such as we have in the other agencies, such as the Manitoba Consultative Co mmittee.

So therefore, Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Inkster, that the resolution of the Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie be amended as follows: (

a) by inserting after the word "a" in the second paragraph the word "continuing", and (

b) by inserting after the word "a" in the third paragraph the word "continuing", and (

c) by adding the following at the end of the resolution: Be it further resolved, that the government, pending the receipt of reports from such committee, make such amendments to present legislation, or introduce such new legislation as from time to time may be desirable by parties concerned; and Be it further resolved that the above mentioned committee, report from time to time to the government, as to its deliberations .and findings and that a report of the deliberations and findings be laid l:)efore the Legislature within 15 days from the commencemen t of each annual session. MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion.

MR . D. M. STANES (St. Jame s): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Churchill that the debate be adjourned, MADAM SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR .. EV ANS: Madam Speaker, would you care to call it 5: 30 ? MADAM SPEAKER: I call it 5: 30 and leave the Chair until 8 o' clock.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	27-4-71
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	27th 4th hansardpdf 71.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	8d7cb8eb72c714554215117c233b7637172f9715

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