Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 133 (30th Legislature, 1st Session)

30-1-133

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LE GISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2; 30 o'clock, Tuesclay, May 21, 1974. Opening Prayer by Mr. S;>eaker. INTRODUC TION OF GUESTS 3687 MR. SPEAKER: Before we proceed I should like to direct the attention of the Hon:mrable Members to the Gallery where we have as our special guests the Selkirk Steelers Hockey Club, Winners of the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association Tier Two, Junior "A" Hockey Champion ship. This club represented Manitoba and are the champions of Canada. This Club comes from the Constituency of the Honourable Member for Selkirk, the Attorney-General.

We also have 60 students of Grade 11 standing of the Daniel Mcintyre School. T hese students are under the direction of Mr. Rohs. This school is located in the Constituency of the Hon:mrable Member for Wellington. On behalf of all the Honourable Members I welcome you here today. Presenting Petitions; Reading and Receiving Petitions; Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees; Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports. The Honourable House Leader. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT HON. SIDNEY GREEN Q. C. (Minister of Mines, Resources & Environmental Management) (Inkster): Mr.

Speaker, I understand that the Committee on Agriculture wishes to reconvene at 3. 00 p. m. this afternoon and it requires the unanimous consent of the House that this be done, I take it that it's to accommodate a group that is in town only for today and is making representa tions. I take it the Committee . . . MR. SPEAKER: Is the House agreed? The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. WARNER H. JORGENSON (Morris): Mr. Speaker, I am not rising to object to the proposal but I think that there should be an explanation made.

We are on Con�urrence in Agriculture and I wonder if in light of that fact that we could postpone the debate on concurrence and go on to other departments until the committee is through. And secondl y, I think we should have the understanding that the committee would meet only to complete hearing of the briefs and not consider clause by clause of the bills before it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable House Leader. MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, that's agreeable and if we reach Concurrences before the Committee is finished, then we will certainly go into the next department. MR.

SPEAKER: Is it agreed by the House that the Committee meet? The Honourable Minister for Tourism and Recreation. HON. RENE E. TOUPIN (Springfield): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement to make. I have copies for members of the Opposition. As acknowledged by yourself Mr. Speaker and by all members of the House, we have in the centre gallery a group of individuals who have achieved the ultimate in Tier Two Junior "A" competition of the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association in 1974 - the winning-of the Canadian Championships.

Before this past hockey season started, this team was unanimously picked for the last place in the North Division of the Manitoba Junior Hockey League.

Since that prediction the Selkirk Steelers Hockey Club has reached the following goals in their championship quest: 1) Dauphin Kings Trophy - for finishing in first place in the North Division of the Mani• toba Junior Hockey League. 2) Ollie Turnbull Trophy - for winning the Manitoba Junior Hockey League Championship and it is interesting to note that the present coach of the Selkirk Team, George Dorman, in winnip:; this trophy beat the West Kildonan North Stars, the team he coached last year. 3) A trophy yet to be named - for winning their Western Canadian semi- final series against the Prince Albert Raiders from Saskatchewan. 4) The Abbott Cup -f or winning the Western Canada Junior Hoc!wy Championship against the Kelowna Buckaroos from British Columbia.

This cup was established in 1919 and the last time Selkirk won the Western Championship was back in 1920. In winning the Abbott Cup, the Kelowna Coach, at one point in the series, referred to the Steelers as the "Selkirk Prairie Chickens". To this Coach Dorman replied, "Show me an

3688 May 21, 19 74. MTNTSTERIAL STATEMENT (MR. TOUPIN cont'd) ..... apple farmer that's tougher than a dirt farmer," 5) Centennial Cup - for winning the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association Tier Two Junior "A" Hockey Championship. This victory against Smith Falls, Ontario was climaxed in the seventh game at 7:0 9 of the first overtime period with a goal by Gord Kaluzniak to give Selkirk a 1 - 0 victory. The Selkirk Steelers road to victory was indeed similar to the story of Cinderella with a difference.

Towards the end they were being likened to another championship team, the Philad elphia Flyers, now our North American professional champions. The Steelers have no one star to depend on, and throughout the year, however, they played a rough and tough brand of hockey and had the depth that is necessary for any team to win a championship. At times during the year they lacked ice time but when it was available they worked long and hard and at one point in the season, won 17 league games in a row.

Besides winning all of their championships away from horn�. after winning the first game of each and every series, this is the first time in the history of the Canadian Amateur Hockey Association that a Junior "A" hockey club has ever won the Canadian Championship away from home. It is only fitting Mr. Speaker and colleagues of the House, that with their presence in the Legislature this afternoon the Province of Manitoba acknowledges and congratulates the entire Selkirk Steelers Hockey Club on the tremendous victory in the Centennial Cup.

This province can also be proud in the fact that this is the second year in a row that a Manitoba team has won this coveted trophy. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin): Mr. Speaker, I thimk you, and I'd like to express the sentiments of the Progressive Conservative Caucus with regard to this very fine hockey team who are in our gallery today; the example that they have set across our great country as sportsmen and athletes of course is well in the record books and is one of which we are all very proud. It also reminds me, Mr.

Speaker, of the fact that Manitoba has two years in a row took the Centennial Cup, that we are getting back into the position that Manitoba enjoyed in the hockeys in the years past when the St. Boniface Seals and the Portage Terriors and the Winnipeg Monarchs were considered to be the prime junior, hockey teams of those days and their record is in the books, so, again, we are very proud of these boys, these athletes, and we wish them every success for the future. Hockey's got a great future today and I'm sure some of those boys that are sitting up there will likely end up close to millionaires in a few years.

We wish them well. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. GORDON E. JOHNSTON (Portage la Prairie) : Mr. Speaker, I join with the other parties in the House in giving our congratulations to the Selkirk Steelers for their great efforts in the past season. But, Mr. Speaker, I wonder who helped draft the statement that the Minister read, because it says in the statement that: it was generally pr-edicted that Selkirk would finish last this year.

Well I never ever did believe that, in all the years I was associated with the Portage Terriors, that there's no way a Selkirk Team has ever lasted a league all the time that I was associated with it. So I do say on behalf of the Liberal Group here that, for the second year in a row we're proud of our Manitoba Hockey Teams in the Junior "A" category and we hope next year that either Dauphin Kings or one of the four Winnipeg Teams will take it all. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: Any other Ministerial Statements or tabling of reports? Notices of Motion; Introduction of Bills. The Honourable Minister of Mines.

INTROD UCTION OF BILLS MR. GREEN: Introduced (by leave) Bill No. 72

an Act to amend the Clean Environment Act. MR. TURNB ULL introduced Bill No. 67,

An Act to amend ·;he Public Printing Act. (Recommended by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor). HON. RON. McBRYDE (Minister of Northern Affairs)(The Pas) introduced Bill No. 75, The Northern Affairs Act. (Recommended by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor). MR. TOUPIN introduced Bill No. 76, The Heritage Manitoba Act. (Recommended by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor).

May 21, 1974 . 3689 INTROD UCTIO+'f Of BILLS MR. STEVE DER EWIANCHUK (Emerson) introduced Bill No. 68,

An Act to amend The Law Society Act (2) . HON. SAUL CH ERNIACK, Q.C. (Minister of Finance)(St. Johns) introduced Bill No. 77 The Statute Law Amendment (Taxation) Act (197 4). (Recomme nded by His Honour the Lieuten ant-Governor). MR. SPEAKER: Questions. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIDNEY SPIVAK, Q.C. (Leader of the Official Opposition)(River Heights): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister and as well in his ca p<J.city as Minister of Urban Affairs.

I wonder if he can indicate whether it's government policy to finance or to provide assis tance to the City of Winnipeg towards the installation of a proper storm sewer system for the city? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. EDWARD SCHREYER (Premier and Minister of Urban Affairs)(Rossmere): Mr. Speaker, the installation of storm sewage ca paci.ty is something which is determined by the City in the light of its over-all sewer and water service requirements.

There is legislation on the books now, both federal and provincial, to assist municipalities in terms of the installation of sewer and water services, expansion thereof, and this is a matter therefore which comes forward from the appropriate municipal authority. MR. SPIVAK: Well I wonder if the Minister can indic ate whether in the discussions with the City of Winnipeg with respect to the opportunities for participation in growth �ax, representa tion was made by the City to the Province of the necessity of some new assistance to provide for the development of a proper storm sewer system in the City of Winnipeg.

MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, the matter of storm sewage ca pacity was some thing which has not been brought forward by the city or any other municipal authority in our discussions to date. MR. SPIVAK: By way really of a supplementary to that question.

I wonder if the First Minister can indicate whether in the discussions with the City dealing with the opportunity for them to participate in a growth tax representation was n:>t made to the province that require ments for capital spending particularly with reference to storm sewer was necessary and had to be co ntemplated and U!ldertajmn by the City of Winnipeg and by the people of the City of Winnipeg. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, in discussions having to do with the adequacy or inadequacy of municipal tax base arguments were put forward by municipal authorities as to the extent to which they anticipated to incur expenditures for capital works in the future; which include sewer and water service; which incl uded streets, included bridges, overpasses and the like. There was no specific singling out of storm sewer capacity as such. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Liberal Party. MR. I. H. (IZZY) ASPER (Leader of the Liberal Party)(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister as Minister for Urban Affairs.

Does the province intend to make any qffer of compensation to the resi(le!lts of the City of Winnipeg who suffered what appears to be several millions of dollars of flood dam age over the weekend from sewage back up? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time that there has been some damage caused by torrential rainfall. Certainly I have no intention of replying to a question such as that in advance of any indication of intent or desire by the City or any other municipal ity in that respect. MR. ASPER: Mr.

Speaker, to the same Minister, Can he indicate on what basis resi dents of rural Manitoba will be compensated for Red River Flood damage to their property, but people in Winnipeg who have just suffered damage apparently don't come under the same flood co mpensation legislation? MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think tllat an examination of the records will show that in the past there has been from time to time compensation paid by senior govern ments, federal and provincial, towards those commu nities and farmyards, towns, villages, that have suffered flood damage as a result of spring runoff flooding.

There has also been in

3690 May 21, 1974. ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. SCHREYER cont'd) ..•.. the past from time to time occasi onal damage ca used by torrential downpours and I don't believe that the records show that there's any program specific ally designed for that purpose. It is a case of ascer taining whether the federal offer on disaster damage financing, repair financing, precludes or does not prec lude the cost that might be incurred in torrential rainfall, other than during spring flood periods. MR. ASPER: Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister.

Would the government then undertake to hold discussions with the insurance industry in Manitoba with a view to attempting to per suade the industry that the --(Int erjection)-- MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. ASPER: ... with a view to attempting to persuade or otherwise convince the industry that the neces sity for excluding basement flood damage from most home insurance policies no longer is relevant in view of the es tablishment by the Government of Manitoba of the Red River Floodway. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, the last part of the question seems to imply a legal opinion and I would not want to comm ent on that. Certainly we can ascer tain just what the law of insurance contract is in respect of damage caused by torrential downpour, and we can do that. We can also ascertain what attitude, if any, the Government of Canada has with respect to the shared federal- provincia l flood cost damage compensation program. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOUGLAS WATT (Arthur): Mr.

Speaker, !would like to ask the First Minister then, if they 're consid ering the whole of the Province of Manitoba and not just the Red River Valley, the whole of the Province of Manitoba is now flooded and many millions of acres will not be seeded this year. ·MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, the matter of flood damage compensa tion is not re stricted to the Red and Assi niboine Rivers. It applies to any waterway that is designated in accordance with local reports and direct observation as having been a flood damaged drainage area.

So in addition to the Red and As siniboine Rivers there are quite a number of rivers and drainage basins in Manitoba that are designated and therefore eligible for federal-provincial compensation.

If my honourable friend now is talking about flooded arable land which at the moment is flooded or far too wet for comm encement of seeding, I would simply have to indica te to him that while the outlook is not all that promising with respect to the proFpects of seeding wheat that nevertheless with respect to barley and oats as my honourable friend well knows there are still - oh, two, three weeks in which it would be premature to answer the question. MR. WATT: A supplementary question then. Could I ask the Minister if this weather is going to con tinue and if it will be pos sible to seed . • . MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. HARRY J. ENNS (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources arid Environmental Management. My question is simply this: has he any information that could support the belief that perhaps if the Greater Winnipeg Flood way had been in full operation during this particular period of time that there might have been some relief to the storm sewer syst em? In other words, the suggestion is made that the floodway not operating to ca pacity, perhaps the gates were closed prematurely in the •.• MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR. GRE EN: Mr. Speaker, the floodgates were operating. !.can't give the honourable member the actual times at this moment, but I know that the floodgates stopped operating I believe it was on Saturday morning and then were put into operation again on Sunday and that they were in full operation at the time of yesterday's torrential rainfall; and my understanding is that the water level of the Red River would have been some two feet higher had it not been for the operation of the Red River Flood way dJ.ring that period.

But during the period of yesterda y's rainfall they were definitely in operation. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: A supplementary question to the same Minister, Mr. Speaker. I think the obvious question is, w:>uld the water level of the Red River have been two or three feet lower had there not been any interruption of the operation of the Floodway? MR. SPEAKER: The question is hypothetical. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I have to tell the honourable member that the Floo dway is

May 21, 1974. 3691 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. GREEN cont'd) •..•. operated in accordance with, as he knows, schemes which are partly based on judgment, and the judgment was to set the Floodway into operation when it became apparent that the -I believe it was after Saturday night's storm. I'll have to get more precise information for my honourable friend, but my information is that the Floodway was operative in such a way as to have dealt with cer tainly last night's storm. I don't think it would have made any difference, it was the ca pacity of the sewer system etc. which ca used the flooding in the basements. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the First Minister. In view of the incr eased gasoline prices this: past weekend, can he indicate why the government has not moved yet to bring in its subsidiza tion program of three to four or five ce nts that was announced some time ago? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't know that there is a definitive answer to my honourable friend's question.

The matter of the pricing of gasoline and diesel fuel has been announced by two of the major companies at 9. 2 cents per gallon in the ca se of the Imperial Oil and 8. 8 cents in the ca se of Shell. That accounts then for the price adjustment up to and inc luding the wholesale level, it does not cover any price changes that might take place at the retail level. There is some necessity I would suggest before we make any definitive announce ment as to amount of subsidy or cushioning to as much as possible ascertain what the end price, the retail price pattern is likely to be.

At the moment that is not yet adequately ascer tainable. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, can the Minister indicate whether the incr eased royalties are at this point accr uing to the province from the increase in prices at the field level? MR. SCHREYER: Well no, Mr. Speaker, my colleague the Minister of Mines and Resources has legislation in draft that will be brought here very soon and in any case the total amount that is to be collected from the increment in value of crude oil will be dedicated for the purpose which we've already outlined in general. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that the price subsidization has taken place in the provinces to the west of us at this point, can the Minister indicate any particular time when we might expect some degree of relief from the ten cent a gallon incr ease in gaso line price here? MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, one can look west, one can look east, the fact of the matter is that Manitoba's oil field production is a given amount and if one calcu lates the amount of revenue that can be obtained by means of applying a different rate of royalty to the increment in value of that oil, and dedicate that aggregate amount towards the cost of cushioning the price of oil to - that is to say, gasoline, diesel fuel to the consumer, that is the policy which has been already announced in outline form.

As to when that will take effect, it will take effect some time soon; whether it be 30 days or 45 days, I'm not in a position to indicate at this particular precise time. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell. MR. HARRY E. GRAHAM (Birtle-R ussell ): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Attorney-General. I was wondering if the Attorney-General had a lapse in IJlemory, or whether he intended to answer in the question period when he promised the other day to bring forward a statement on the liquor policy of this government. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, there was no lapse in memory. I have a statement in front of me dealing with changes in liquor policy in Manitoba, administration really than policy in itself. This is pursuant to the question from the Honourable Member from Portage la Prairie.

First, in respect to the delisting of fortified wines, in that regard I wish to indic ate to the House that on the basis of the experiment of the past six months, the delisting of low priced high alcohol content wines is being extended across the province, and this extension will be effected immedia tely the Commission has been able to carry out the administrative mechanics; a major point in that during the six month pilot project the Commission discovered a 53 percent decrea se in the co nsumption of pure alcohol wines in affected areas.

Acco rdingly, the Commission records that there has occurred a definite switch to lower alcohol con tent wines in the area in question.

3692 May 21, 1974 . ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. PAWLEY cont'

d) Another considera tion is that it is felt that many people have used high alcohol products due to traditionally low prices while natural wines that have been widely stated as the drink of modera tion and more assoc iated with family living but are more costly to produce and sub sequently higher in cost, have not until the period of the past five years really become a factor in Manitoba life style. Prices of wines will be altered. Past pricing factors for many years have contributed by placing emphasis on cost without considera tion to alcohol content.

This seeming disre gard for alcohol content in pricing is now being altered by the Manitoba Liq•.wr Control Commission and the new pricing policy being introduced will contain a factor which places more emphasis on cost per ounce of alcohol. Prices of some 300 table wines or natural wines will come down 17 percent in Manitoba, but the minimum price per 26 -ounce bottle will not be less than $1 . 20 to the consumer. This will make these table or natural wipes le ss expensive to the consumer than is presently the case.

Next, it is mentioned that several low priced brands of high alcohol content wine will be delisted; other brands of fortified wines will be affected by the new pricing structure so that the minimum ret ail price will be $1 . 85 per 26-ounce bottle. Thirty brands prices will be increased with, as I have mentioned, the minimum retail price being $1 . 85 per bottle. The Commission will list a product characteristic of sherry and port wines but with lesser alcohol content than the products presently being delisted. These would retail to the consumer at $1 . 40 per 26 oz. bottle.

Further to the above changes the Commission has not as yet accepted rec ently received price increases from Canadian distilleries but it can be anticipated that there will be an increase to the consumer for Canadian spirits within the next two months. However, the Commission advises me that the few announced prices so far recei ved seem exorbitantly high and the Commission is negotiating for a reduction in the proposed price increases from the distilleries. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member from Birtle-Russell. MR . GRAHAM: Mr.

Speaker, again I say to the Minister, did he have a lapse of memory in not making it as a ministerial statement so that we could then have the opportunity to reply? MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'm afraid that the Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell must have a lapse in memory because this matter rose as a re sult of a question that was directed towards myself by the Honourable Member from Portage, and it is customarily ex-, pected that those questions are answered during the question period. MR. GRAHAM: A further supplementary. Did not the Minister promise the House that he would have a statement to make today ?

MR . SPEAKER : Order please. The question is argumentative. The HonJurable Member for Flin Flon. MR . THOMAS BARROW ( Flin Flon) : Mr. Speaker , may I make a statement of non politica l nature? MR . SPEAKER: (Agread) The Honourable Member for Flin Flo:'"!. MR . BARROW: Well just to prove, Mr. Speaker, that Selkirk, Springfield, Porta ge la Prairie aren't the only centres involved in hockey, I'd like to let you know that the north have a strong involveme nt with our national game, and as we all know the Philadelphia Flyers won the Stanley Cup on Sunday afternoon.

It's the first expansion team to win the Stanley Cup or even to come close. It proves that Orr, Espo sito and other Bruins are just normal human beings that can be taken. I'd like to mention that the leader and the Captain of the Flyers is a young man by the name of Bobby Clarke, he's a Flin Flon boy who worked his way up in the Flin Flon hockey chain against great odds, he suffers from sugar diabetes. Bobby has proved to be an inspira tion not only to the youth of Flin Flon, not only to the youth of Manitoba but to all our Canadian youth.

I hope you'll all join me in congratulating Captain Bobby Clarke and the Philadelphia Flyers. (Applause) MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR . J. PAUL MARION (St. Boniface) : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to direct my question to the Honourable the Attorney-General. Has the Minister or his colleague, the Minister of Public Works, evaluated the functional pos sibilities of the Winnipeg Public Safety Building with respect to the Central Magistrates Court facility he has been talking about, and

May 21, 1974. 36 93 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. MARION cont'd) •.. •• also with respect to the neutral custodial force, a report of which he received from the Law Reform Commiss ion, I believe? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. PAW LEY: Mr. Speaker, cer tainly this is a matter that in principle the government has felt is in need of a change in that there ought to be a separation of facilities, judges from the courts from the remand and the police facilities. It is then only a question as to how thi.s can be best realized in order to obtain our objectives.

And we have to date preliminary information from the Department of Public Works which has been doing some evaluating of the proposals, which I might mention have not come by way of any formal comm unication from the city but only by a reference by Councillor Steen. The preliminary information questions the wisdom at this point of accepting any such proposal from the city. l. It is pointed out that the renovation costs may be as great as they would be involved in the er ection of a new building. 2.

There is questions raised at to the parking difficulties and problems that might be inherent with an acceptance of Councillor Steen' s proposal. So on the surface at the moment it does not appear to be a wise move based upon the information rec eived from the Department of Public Works. Those inquiries are only in the preliminary stage however and there will be further investigations along that line. MR. MARION: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the same Minister.

With respect to evaluating the costs of erecting a new facility and remode ling or refurbishing to fulfill the use of the Winnipeg Public Safety Building have there been any cost studies of any seriousness undertaken to guide the Minister in his decisi on on which facility should be used? MR . PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, it is my understanding there have been no detailed cost studies, that the Department of Public Wo rks only has a basis from previous experience and upon the cost of renovations so there is no specific detailed study of the particular case at hand; and the information that they have is based on purely on their own experience from re novating such buildings. MR. MARION: A final supplementary to the same Minister, Mr. Speaker.

Will the Minister keep under adviseme nt the pos sibilities afforded the City of Winnipeg in building a new facility in the area to refurbish the general area if the province were to purchase that existing facility ? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The question is hypothetical. The Honourable Member for St. James. MR. GEORGE MINAKER (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

I wonder if the First Minister could indicate, is it his intention to meet with the City of Winnipeg officials to discuss the flooding which has occurred during the past weekend with the pos sibility of considera tion being given to technical and financial assistance? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, if the city requests such a me eting we would of cour se want to be able to accommoda te so as to meet with them in fact.

Insofar as technical assistance is concerne d, it 's not my impr ession that the City Department of Works is feeling that it requires additional technical assistance although that may be; I've not been advised and so I do not assume that. And insofar as financial assistance is concerned as I've already indicated there is available to the city funds from the Special Municipal Loan Fund, labour cost of which is forgiveable which the city can apply towards any desired public works that it wishes to carry out, I believe an amount that aggregates something in the order of 8 to $ 8. 2 million. MR.

SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Minnedosa. MR. DA VID BLAKE (Minnedosa) : Thank you, Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Honourable the Minister of Agriculture. I wonder if he could advise the House the reasons for the withholding of the renewal licenses for the A. I. technicians in the-Province of Manitoba? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. HON. SAMUEL USKIW (:(\iinister of Agric ulture)(Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I was not aware that they were withheld until the honourable member put his question to me a number of days ago, and that matter is be ing discussed internally at the mom ent.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister, it re lates to the Air Canada Overhaul Base or the new Air Canada Overhaul Base for Winnipeg. I wonder in view of what appears to be a political controversy developing on this matter --(Interjection) -- Well

3694 May 21, 1974. ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. SPIVAK cont'd) ..•.. I wonder what appears to be a new political controve rsy developing then - whether the First Minister would not feel it incumbent at this time to call the Air Canada Air Policy Committee made up of representatives of all the com munity to be able to present a detailed report up-to-date of what has taken place and what likely will take place with respect to this matter in the next few weeks. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I have been in communication both by direct con versation, telephone and by letter with the Prime Minister's office and with the offices of a number of Federal Ministers. We have sent to the Prime Minister's office some several weeks ago a resume of the events leading up to the present decision that has to be taken by the federal authorities with respect to the Air Canada Overhaul Base and frankly_, Sir, I am un ce rtain as to whether or not any political action that is taken here will nec essarily be produc tive, it could just as easily be counter productive.

If the suggestion is that we should muster some large scale lobby then of course it is open to other contending cities to do the same thing. We believe that the ca se has been made and it is a case of a decision having to be taken. And I do not decry the efforts made by way of mustering together larger groups but that action is open to any city that wishes to counter propose. MR. SPIVAK: Mr.

Speaker, my question to the First Minister is in view of the fact that this committee has been in operation since, I think 1963 if I'm correct, and more or less has dealt with the government on this matter and has been informed by the government of what steps had taken place, would it not be in the interests of the government to see to it that this committee was reconvened and an opportunity given for presentation of information in connec tion with this matter simply beca use there is, I would think, a lack of information and con fusion at this time as to what likely will occur? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't agree that there is a lack of information or confusion existing apart from the fact that a decision is required by the federal authorities and they have not as yet made a definitive decision in that respect. However I do not wish to leave the impression that we are opposed to the idea of convening the Air Policy Committee or an appropriate c �oss

section thereof. I might advise my honourable friend that approximately ten days ago I was in communication with the Prim e Minister indicating that we were prepared to cOnvene a meeting of a group which could be described as the Air Policy Committee and that I would like to be advised as to the manner in which the Government of Canada 'M:>uld.prefer to receive such a group or delegatio�, and this therefore does not rule out the possibility that we ca n convene this group, although I have no means of assuring that in fact an audience with the appropriate federal authorities will be granted.

That has been requested, we have not got a definitive reply as yet. MR. SPIVAK: Yes. To the.First Minister. I wonder if he could indicate to the House whether the Provincial Government would be prepared to accept as one of the alternatives what has been referred to as a partial overhaul base which would not be an overhaul base but would :mly allow for servicing to a c ertain extent of the new airplanes to be purchased by Air Canada. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't know that there is an answer possible to a question such as that, whether the province would be prepared to accept.

The province has made its case as to why it feels that there is justification in expecting that the new air overhaul activity be ca rried out at the site of the Winnipeg International Airport or in very near proxim ity thereto, and now the decision has to be made by those who are charged with the responsibil ity for taking a decision such as that and I would not presume to put it in terms as to whether the province does or doesn't accept that. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Liberal Party. MR. ASPER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

It relates to the en thusiasm shown in the House in the last half hour for hockey in Manitoba. I wonder if the First Minister could report on what progress or steps are being taken to ensure that the Winnipeg Jets will be retained in Winnipeg. Has the government taken any steps, or in whose lap is the nil tter now res ting? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I imagine it's resting in the lap from whence it originated, and if it interests my honourable friend I've asked for some indication from those who are most directly interested, for some indica tion as to where in Canada provincial

May 21, 1974. 3695 ORAL QUESTIONS (MR. SCHREYER cont 'd) . . . . . governments are financially involved with profess ional commercial sport and I am awaiting the answer. MR. ASPER : Mr. Speaker, does the First Minister not consider that a preced ent was established in this province, in Manitoba, when the race track was first formed by a loan from this government - or from the Government of Manitoba? MR . SCHREYER: Well, Mr.

S9eaker, I am not aware of the circumstances surrounding the Assiniboia Downs' decision back in 1956 or 1957, whenever it was, and I would not take the time of the House to argue the appropriateness of the analogy that is attempted to be drawn between the paramutuals and the operation of horse racing with that of professi onal commercial team sport such as hockey or whatever. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR . McK ENZIE: Mr . Speaker, my question is for the Honourable Minister of Tourism and Recr eation and Cultural Affairs but I see he's left the Chamber due to business commit, ment no doubt.

Maybe I could direct it to the acting Minister or the Fir st Minister. Due to the many concerns from the Parkland region around Dauphin regarding the phase-out of the Parkland Regional Library, I wonder when the government would announce its new policy regarding this Parkland? MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Highways. HON. PETER BURTNIAK (Minister of Highways)( Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that there is any definite commi tment or approach to phase out the library on the part of the government or anybody else.

I think that the question was asked some time ago if I'm not mistaken, by either the Honourable Member for Roblin or someone else, and I think at that time the Minister of Tourism and Cultural Affairs did give the answer to that question. MR. McK ENZIE: Well a supplementary question, then to the Honourable Minister. It's either a misunderstanding or my understa nding was that a new policy ... MR . SPEAKER: Question. MR. McKENZIE: ... and could I ask the Minister does it have to come by legislation or is there to be a policy change from the present Parkland Regional Development library system? MR.

BURTNIAK : No , I think, Mr. Chairman, in reply to that question, I think it's just a matter of time that a decision will be made by the government and the people have been told of this fact and I think that they are aware as to what action transpired or will take place in the future. I think I am quite safe in saying that there is no intention on the part of the government to withdraw that kind of a program. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the Minister of Mines and Resources. I wonder if in view of the statement by the U. S.

Government General Accounting Office to have the Garrison project halted, or construction halted until a further accounting is provided re sulting from the di spute with Canada, whether he can advise that this has at this point had any significant effect on our chances of having the project stalled? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR. GR EEN: No, Mr. Speaker, I couldn 't give my honourable friend an asses sment of that. I believe I saw a statement reported in today's newspaper but I couldn't tell the honourable member the effect of it.

All I can say is that if that is the posi tion being taken by the United States State Department, it 's consistent with our strategy to try to get that department to re cognize the seriousne ss of the matter insofar as Manitoba is concerned. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, a further question. I wonder if the Minister would undertake to provide the Legislature as soon as pos sible with the communication last week to the Canadian Government by the Secretary of State Office in the United States to the Provincial Government plus the one announced today of the General acc ounting office.

Furthermore, I wonder if the Minister could indicate whether the Manitoba Government has considered the pos sibility of a Class Action Suit by Manitoba in the U. S. Courts on this matter? MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR . GREEN: Well Mr. Speaker, I'll try to deal with the two questions in order. The first one, will I undertake to give the information as soon as it becomes available? Yes. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we consider that the most effective way of proceedi ng is the way in which we have been proce eding.

3696 May 21, 1974. ORAL QUESTI ONS MR . CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could advise on the last question, whether or not the government has considered whether a government such as Manitoba can pursue a Class Action Suit in the U. S. Courts on the matter ..• MR. SPEAKER : Order please. Order please. It 's a repetition. The question has been answered. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member asks me whether we have considered it, and I can tell him, Mr.

Speaker, that we have considered many alternatives amongst which is the efficacy of the Courts to resol ve this problem, and after giving considera tion to all the alternatives, Mr. Speaker, we have decided to deal with the one which we consider to be the most effective, and that is the way in which we have proceeded. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR . A. R. ADAM (Ste. Rose) : Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day, I just wanted to remind all the Members of the Standing Committee of Agriculture that we'll be reconvening immedi ately. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day.

The Honourable House Leader. ORDERS OF TH E DAY- GOVERNMENT BILLS BILL NO. 55 MR. GREEN: Yes Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you would proceed with the Bills that are on the Order Paper. Second Reading. MR . SPEAKER : Bill No. 55. The Honourable Member for Souris -Killarney. The Honourable Member for sturgeon Creek. MR . J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek) : Mr. Speaker, if I could I would like to speak on this bill and have it stand in the honourable member 's name. MR . SPEAKER: Is that agreeable? The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR . FRANK JOHNSTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, unfortunately I did not hear the First Minister 's remarks when he introduced this bill, and I have not got the Hansard as yet that the remarks would be in, but I have questioned some of my collea gues on it, and his remarks were not too long apparently, but I would like to comment on the bill as I read it and the only thing that I can say, Mr. Speaker , is the government, the Provincial Government of Manitoba is legislating theft from the City of Winnipeg. Mr.

Speaker , this bill puts into action one of the worst principles of Legislature that one could ever fathom, that's about the best explanation I could have. This bill is now saying to the City of Winnipeg that you cannot collect $ 350, 000 worth of taxes after you have provided all the public works, the water, the sewer, the fire inspection, the police inspection, clean the roads in front of the building, etc. , and we now have back taxes on the Arts Centre of $3 50,000, and this bill says in the last section, Mr. Speaker, that the City may not collect those back taxes.

It also says a little further up in the bill, Mr. Speaker,· that if the building is ever used for anything other than an Arts Centre it refers back to the province, not the City --(Inter jectio n) -- We've heard from the expert again, Mr. Speaker, from his seat. But, you know, here we have a situation where the government says the City cannot collect the back taxes; the City has had to provide all the services involved with this building, Mr. Speaker, but the City cannot collect the back taxes, and if the building is ever used for anything else it reverts back to the province, Now, Mr.

Speaker , that's the closest thing to theft I've ever heard of in my life. You know it was a wonderful thing, Mr . Speaker, if you want to talk about who supplied the money, if there's an agreement between somebody, that's fine. If you want to talk about who supplied the money, the Centennial Centre, the Centennial Concern Hall is on Crown Lands. The Franco S<>c'ety is on Crown Land;;. T'uere's a bill covering both of them by agreement ; there's no bill covering the Art Centre.

The Art Centre will now just refer ( ?) back to the province, if it's not used for anything else, after the City, after the City has given the services such as taxes, and the Honourable Member says, "who supplied the money?" Well I would say the people of Winnipeg supplied the money for the clearing of snow, for the fire inspectors, for the policemen that have been used to handle traffic in the area. I'd say that the City of Winnipeg has every right to consider. If the province wants legisla tion like this, Mr. Speaker, why should they say in a

section of this bill that the City cannot col lect the back taxes? Why don't they say to the City, we will pay the back taxes and then we will pass legisla tion like this, or if necessa ry pass a bill for

May 21, 1974. 3697 BILL N0. 55 (MR. FRANK JOHNSTON cont'd) ••... the future, instead of saying to the City, "you must write off $ 35 0, 000 worth of taxes". Mr. Speaker , I can't really think why the province wants to do this, other than they want more control of everything. Mr. Speaker, the member, the First Minister says the City agrees to it. We ll, Mr. Speaker, did the City come l.'ljil and make any agreement with the province? Did the City come up and say, we would like to negotiate this.

Are we as legislators in this Chamber supposed to pass legislation stealing $ 350, 000 from the City of Winnipeg without knowing there was ne gotiation, without knowing whether the City initiated it, or who initiated it. You know, Mr. Speaker, this is just not quite according to Hoyle, as we say, after all. Now the other section, Mr. Speaker, says there'll be no grants in lieu of taxes either . That's fine, if you want to do that and put it in a bill the same as you have the Centennial Concert Hall, and the Franco Centre is already in a bill. The only effect that this bill re ally has on the Franco in

section (

c) of the Bill, the Franco Socie ty, pardon me,

Section 1 (

a) of the bill, is really defining the bot.mdaries, because there 's already a bill concerning that building; but it again is on Crown land. Mr. Speaker, then we have another little situation, which nobody seems to mention, may be the City of Winnipeg did agree ; we don't know that. I haven't been able to find that there was any meetings with the Councillors on that basis. If the City has agreed, wants to give up the taxes, I'm sure the City may say well, you know, if that's the case, we have $3 50, 000 owing and if the building's ever going to be used for anything else, we would like our money.

Isn't it a wonderful thing to take the City Park off the City's hands, $1 , 900, 000 and then stick them with $3 50, 000 in this bill. That's a lot of help to the City of Winnipeg. And the other area, Mr. Speaker , which I'm sure my colle ague from Brandon will elaborate on, this bill is re ally designed to seem to being the Keystone Centre, under the involvement of this legislation.

It reverts back to Bill 12 of last year where Bill 12 was brought in, or pre sented by somebody, to exempt the Keystone Centre from paying school taxes, and it was amended by this government so that there would be no taxes paid, and that bill didn't go through the House last year, Mr. Speaker. So now we have this little manipula tion to bring the Keystone Centre in this, and the Keystone Centre has a written agreement with the Province - there are three owner s of that building -u nder an agreement presented to the City of Brandon by the Province of Manitoba, which this bill will wipe out.

Here again the City of Brandon will lose, will lose the taxes that are owing to the City of Brandon on the Keystone Centre. So, Mr. Speaker, this bill is a design first of all in the section, first part of the bill, it covers the Franco, which gives us the boundaries of that building also, but it is covered by S-40 of the Centennial's Act; there 's another Centennial Act coveri ng the Theatre Centre, giving us the boundaries; we now have the Keystone Centre boundaries put in and the Art Centre boundaries put in.

Exemption of taxes - there will be no taxes charged; It will not be on the - it will be shown as a nil asses sment, the Art Centre. There'll be no grants in lieu of taxes. Transfer of Title cannot be transferred unless it is approved by the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council. If the building is not used for what it is presently being used for, it reverts to the province, and the last part of it says "and any taxes that are owing to you, you cannot collect. " Mr. Speaker , I think that that's a dictatorial bill; and I think that the cities have the right to negotiate these kinds of things or initiate them.

If the City wants to give a grant iri lieu of taxes for the services they give - and every City gives servic es, Mr. Speaker, let 's not kid ourselves about that.

If you think police services, and fire inspection, and crowd control, is not some sort of reaso nable . . . or charge that should be made upon a building, I say this government if they don't realize that that's a reasonable charge, they're Wrong, and to just wipe it out and say the City will take the lo ss, hot the government; in other words we have a government that says we will not take the lo ss, we will legisla te that the City must take the lo ss, Mr. Speaker, I for one don't think that's fair legis lation and, as I said at the beginning, it 's almost theft from the City of Winnipeg. Thank you. MR .

SPEAKER: The question will remain in the name of the Honourable Member for Souris -Killarney. Bill No. 16. The Honourable Member for Rhineland. (Stand) Bill No. 61. The Honourable Member for Riel. (Stand) Agreed. The Honourable House Leader. MR . GREE N: Yes, Mr. Speaker , can we please proceed with Concurrences with the

3698 (MR. GREEN cont'

d) General isn't it? May 21, 1974. . . . Attorney-General's Department? Department of the Atto rney- ATTORNEY-GENERAL- CONCURRENCE MR . SPEAKER : Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1 6, 682, 400 for Attorney-General. Resolutions 20-27 se parately and coll ectively. Pass. The Honourable Member for Charleswood. MR.

ARTHUR MOUG (Charleswood) : Our critic to the Attorney-General's Department has gone out for a few minutes and I think because the Attorney-General wasn't in his place that he -s o I think that it would be fitting now that we're talking to the Attorney-General's Department, and I see the �· C. 's on the flow again. I thought possibly this afternoon if the Attorney-General was in his place, I could ask him if he could find an honorary Q. C. to give the Member for Birtle-Russell, who is a critic for the Conservative Party. But, Mr.

Spea ker , I would ask you to hold up, ask the House Leader to hold up for a minute or two until our honorary Q. C. gets back. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: Incidentally while we're waiting for the Honourable Member for Birtle Russell, I am advised that because of flooding problems -I don't know whether this came from the Minister of Public Works or not -t hat the Queen's Printer is out of action and therefore Hansard will be delayed in its printing. I hope it do esn't inconvenience the Honourable Members too much. The Honourable Member for Birtle-R ussell. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Speaker, things are moving rather fast in this Chamber and we're into Concurrence on the Attorney-General's Department at a time when just a few minutes ago really, the Attorney-General announced a statement on the policy that is going to apply on the Liquor Control Commission. We did not get a copy of it. I've just been handed a copy of it now and I haven't had a chance to re ad it yet. I hope that some other members will be re ading it, and will be able to make some comments on it.

But I think it's rather significant, significant in two or three respects, Sir, in that while the heading of the release says that it is the Attorney-General 's statement, it is my suspicion, Sir, that it is really the statement of the Chairman of the Liquor Control Commission. I don't believe that the Attorney-General has provided the leader ship that is necessa ry. On Friday, Mr.

Speaker, in reply to the Minister of Finance, I was referring to the First Minister , and I think that it's only appropriate that maybe we should expand the field and take a look at one or two of the other departments too, Sir , ·and in a manner of being consistent Sir, I think that the leadership of the Attorney-General is sadly lacking in this department too. We realize that he is fairly new to the department, and the fact that he is now a Q. C. may have gone to his head a bit, but, Sir, there is in my opinion a definite lack of leader ship in the opera tion of the Liquor Control Commission.

There is also, Sir , in my estimation a great lack of input into the field of alcohol educa tion and rehabilitation. This department is probably raising the equivalent cif two cents sales tax- I'm just guessing at that. I hope the Minister of Finance could maybe, when he's finished his comments with the Member for Flin Flan, maybe verify that statement. Now I'll repeat it again for the Minister of Finance. I would suggest that the revenue from the Liquor Control Commission is ro ughly equal to two cents on the sales tax. Is that a fairly close approxima tion ? Would it be • . MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

Would the honourable member addr ess his rema rks to the Chair. MR. GRAHAM: Well, Sir, I apologize. Through you to the Minister of Finance, Sir, I would like to know just how much it does raise in comparison to the sales tax, and I would think that it is about one and a half to two cents. But maybe the Minister of Finance can give me the actual figures, but the main point is that it is a very significant amount of revenue.

And the problems that are caused in the Province of Manitoba by the sale of alcohol, the pro blems that are per sonal problems for many Manitobans, that because of the policies of the Liquor Control Commis sion I think the remedies must become a responsibility of the govern ment; and we don't find that the revenue --(Interjection) -- I have just rec eived the answer from the Minister of Finance, Sir, that it 's one and two-thirds. The liquor revenue is equal to about one and two-thirds cents of sales tax in the provi nce, so we realize how significant the revenue is.

But the contribution that is made by the province to the field of alcohol education and rehabilitation has to be greatly expanded. I was hoping that the Member for Winnipeg Centre

May 21, 1974 . 3699 CONCURRENCE (MR. GRAHAM cont'd) •.... would be in the Chamber, Sir, because he has a very respon sible position in that respect, and all I can do is wish him every success with the limited supply of funds that the province is giving him. I would sincerely hope that the contributions made will be greatly expanded in the very near future. Sir, we have seen the work that has been done by some of these groups. Groups of people, Sir, who are dedica ted, that work far be yond their normal capacity in their effort to improve the lost of their fellow-man.

I would hope that before too long that this government will bring forward a legislative comm ittee once again to study the entire operation of the Liquor Control Commission. We have had detailed studies made in the past but, Sir , I think that perhaps it's time the politician became involved in those studies.

I would hope that the legisla tive commit tee embracing all parties in the Chamber will have the opportunity before too long to look at the problems of alcoholism in the Province of Manitoba; and also to look at the operation of the Liquor Control Commission and the great freedom that that Commission has had in its operation, freedom that I think extends beyond that of the legislation establishing it orig inally intended. I believe that it should be responsible to the Legislature.

I believe that the policies and the operation of the Liquor Control Commis sion should be directl y controlled by the Legislatureo We have seen far too much freedom in that operation up till now. Mr. Speaker, I hope that before we get through concurrence that there will be other members who have had an opportunity to examine the statement of the Attorney-General on this importa nt issue. So that we should have a debate right at this time on the cour se that is being proposed, and unfortunately we have had very little time to study the statement of the Minister when he gave it only less than an hour ago. MR.

SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. JAMES H. BILTON (Swan River) : Mr. Speaker, as you know, this is the last opport unity one might have to comment on the Attorney-General's estimate s. I personally have no objection to the figure of sixteen million-odd. But one should retrace one 's steps, and I feel that the points that I brought up when questioning the Minister during the handling of the estimates have certainly not been answered to my satisfaction and cer tainly not to the satis faction of the people of northern Manitoba. And in particular I would refer to the jail con ditions in The Pas.

I know the Minister in rece nt months has endeavoured to improve actual living conditions in that particular situation, but I'm suggesting to him that it no .way near meets the needs of the population throughout northern Manitoba. And I think I pointed out at the time that when people are awaiting trial or in custody awaiting trial, in many instances they have to be taken many hundreds of miles and held and brought back again, and then if they are convicted they're moved to jails or places of retention in southern Manitoba away from their families, and a great deal of hardship is crea ted.

And all I intended to expect from the Minister was that the government was seriously considering doing something with this situa tion, but the Minister did not give me the satisfaction, nor has he given the people of Northern Manitoba the satisfaction. Where the loca tion of that particular jail may be I care not, so long as it is in the vici nity of the major settlements of pepple. And I believe the Minister must take this under serious considera tion and move in that direct ion. Another point I brought up at the time was that of native policemen, and there are many remote areas still without police protection.

And here again I know the department has made an effort to train people for this work and I applaud them for it, but I don't think they're moving along fast enough to give the protection to the people that the people are asking for. And I particularly asked him for a resume as to whether or not crime was on the increase in the province, or on the decrease; certainly by an increase of 21 members of the RCMP from 490 to 511 suggests that crime is on the increase.

And I feel the people of Manitoba should know, should know the facts of the matter , whether things are on the increase or on the de crease, and I believe the Minister is failing his duty by not answering that question in detail so that it can be properly published for public information. And again, I spoke of the cost of the RCMP. In a com munity such as ours, and there are many around the province, I think it 's terrible that the com munity has to put out something in the neighbourhood of $6 5, 000 for the protection, police protection of a community of 4, 000 people.

And I have seen of late whereby in the City of Toronto, they have put the men back on the beat and it has done a great deal toward reducing a lot of petty crime. And I believe that the Minister might use his good offices to pass that word down to the RCMP, because I see no

3700 May 21, 1974. CONCUR RENCE (MR. BILTON cont'd) •..•. reason in the world why the Town of Swan River and similar towns of that size, possi bly a mile square, being patrolled in automobiles. I think a great deal could be accomplished by the men patrolling the main streets and becoming acquainted with the people and showing an attitude of co-oper ation, which they intend to do but they ca n't do it from sitting in the seat of a motor car driving up and down. With those few remarks, Mr.

Speaker, I wish the Minister well and I hope he will spend that $1 6 million in such a way that next year he'll come reducing it by four million. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. MARION: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I intend on being extremely brief with respect to my comments on tlie concurrence motion dealing with the Attorney --General's budget. I think that during the question period I was leading to an area that particularly interests me, and that is in consequence of some of the moves that the Minister intends to take which I feel are reasonable actions on his part.

I think the report that was provided to him with respect to the neutral custodial force by the Manitoba -Law Reform Com�issi on is one that warrants his attention, and I'm pleased to see that he is going to be taking the measures that are necessary to implement such a report. His comments on the report itself were favourable, and he used as an example in some of his acceptance of the report the Vaughan Street Detention Home and the way the neutral custodi al force there operates, which makes a great deal of sense to me.

I think that if this were the case in the Magistrates' Court area we would be alleviating what appears to exist in ce rtain problems, although the Attorney-General points out that this has got to be a very minimal area of complaint by prisoners who feel that they are being unfairly treated or unf<tirly inter rogated.

I would trust that the Honourable Attorney-General would take under advisement the kind of situation that the City of Winnipeg will find itself in, should in essence both steps that the Minister intends on taking, the neutral custodial force and the central magistrate court facility - if he does take these steps, it would seem to me that the City of Winnipeg are going to end up with a building, that Public Safety Building I was referring to in the question period, that will not be of a great value to them. Twenty-five perc ent of the area of that building is set aside as a custodial area.

A great sum of money was spent on those facilities, if I can refer to thein as facilities, and it would seem to me that the moment the City of Winnipeg is no longer faced with the responsibility of being custodian to people waiting for trial then those facilities are totally obsolete and som ething will have to be done with them.

If because of investigations made by the Attorney-Genera l, it is found that the purchase of that building is not a feasible step to take, then I would suppose that he will take under advisement the sort of situation that the City of Winnipeg finds itself in beca use it will then have facilities for which it has no use, facilities which are not old and which were extremely costly. It would seem to me that perhaps the City of Winnipeg --(Interj ection)-- Costly. Costly.

Not having been a boarder in those facilities, I would not know whether they are top flight accommodations or not, but we might arrange for the Minister of Finance to make a tour of them to judge for himself. I would suppose that the City of Winnipeg if they really do become obsolete will be --(Inter jection)-- I just don't like those places, Mr.

Minister -I would suppose that if we do take the steps that render this facility obsolete the Minister will then find himself in a position of having to certainly grant some kind of assistance to the City of Winnipeg, be cause after all the facilities were built when the rules of the game were such that they had to be provided.

If the rules of the game are changed and a facility has not been completely written off and the provincial agency doesn't feel that it wants to carry on with these facilities, then I would think that any amount and large sums of money will have to be spent to make a total floor of that Public Safety Building utilizable. It would seem to me then that the Provinc ial Government will have a moral responsibility in providing the funds that are required.

And I would expect that the Minister would use this kind of rationale as part of his soul searching when he decides whether or not the provinc e is interested in purchasing that facility, thereby providing the City of Winnipeg an opportunity of rebuilding the kind of facility that it needs for its own functions in the immediate area of the City Hall. And this would act as a two-pronged sort of approach, it would provide the City of Winnipeg with an upgrading program at the same time in the area immedia tely adjoining City Hall. I think that I'd also like to make a very brief co mment, Mr.

Speaker, on the legal services that the Minister now proposes to broaden. Here again I estimate that the Minister is pleased with the way legal aid services have functioned in the City of Winnipeg in the two

May 21, 1974. 3701 CONCURRENCE (MR. MARION cont 'd) .. ... areas that they opera te and he is now willing to go further in this experiment. Or perhaps we shouldn't call it an experiment at this stage, it might now be an accepted program of the Government of Manitoba, and he is intending to bring the program to other Manitobans both in the Brandon and other sections of our province. It would seem to me that this has all the pos sibilities of a very good program, and I can't criticize the Minister for making that kind of decis ion.

It would seem to me however that he should be cautioned that a continual kind of appraisal of legal aid services be carried out, because it is the kind of program that cannot respond to what it was origi nally designed to do, and I would expect that the Minister because he is now investing very considera ble sums of money in that area would have this service under continual and continued appraisal as to its functioning. Mr.

Speaker, those were the only comments I wanted to make with respect to the con currence motion, and I also wish the Attorney-General well in his new programs and I trust that he will spend judiciously the $1 6 : 7 million that he is being granted. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to take the opportunity oh the estimates to comment on the just distributed state:rnent of the Attorney-General regarding a new pricing and listing policy for the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission. Mr.

Speaker , having just had it for the last few minutes and read through it, I find it an extremely curious document to decipher what sort of rationalization could have brought about the recom mendations and decisions of the Manitoba Liquor Commission, and I think that the statement perhaps has some contradictions in it, or what are apparent contradictions at least. Mr.

Speaker, it would seem that while the deci sion here basically is to extend the ban on some of the high alcohol content wines to not only the experimental area of northern Manitoba but to the entire province; secondly, to delist some brands and to change the price structure of those that rema in. Well, Mr . Speaker, there is an admission in the announce ment here. It says that while natural wines have been widely stated as the drink of modera tion and more associa ted with family living, but are more to produce, have not until the period of the past five years really become a factor in the Manitoba life style.

The point I am trying to make is there seems to be an admis sion in here that wines - and I would assume that this might include fortified wines - have developed a place in the life style of Manitoba that is fairly much expected, although in contradiction to this of course there's another admissi on here in the statement that there is certainly an abuse of the wines, particularly of the fortified nature.

But if the wines in general have developed a natural position in Manitoba's life style, is it not first of all much more logica l simply to put a price structure on all of these so that they're not banned, they can still develop their place in the life style, however they're used as table wines or in a particular part of the eating process - not ban them from their use, but simply make them a luxury.

I'm sure that the reason that there is a problem with fortified wines, is that they're the cheapest source of booze or a drunk, the cheapest source of a drunk that there is on the shelf, and that if you remove that cheap source simply by making it a more expensive source in line with the whiskies and beers and regular wines, does this not over the long term solve the problem ? So, Mr.

Speaker, unless I am deadly wrong and there is evidence that has been produced that I'm not aware of or that hasn't been provided to the Legislature or to the general public, is there evidence in other parts of Canada that the problem can't be solved simply by removing fortified wines as a cheap source of a drunk? In other words, can the problem not be solved of the run on fortified wines by simply upping the price to the point where the amount of alcohol you get for a dollar is about equivalent to what you get with other forms? So it's difficult to rationalize, Mr.

Speaker, reading this statement, why the government would decide to ban the wines across the province. It seems to be based on the fact that in the experimental area that there was a marked improvement in the experimental area, but it doesn't seem to provide any proof that the marked improvement might not have occurred had they simply upped the price significantly. We 're not quarreling with the right of the govern ment to change the price structure, in fact we're endorsing it as a lever to influence drinking habits, but I don 't think that the rationaliz ation is complete here. So, Mr.

Speaker, I raise this as a- I think a major issue because the government is introducing a form of prohibition to control a problem rather than introduce an economic lever which might do it as well over a given period of time. As a matter of fact the Member for St. James here has referred to just in reading it as a form of staged prohibition, and I think

3702 May 21 , 1974. CONCUR RENCE (MR. CRAIK cont'd) ..... probably that presents the case as accura tely as possible. And our contention in reading it over this short period of time, just the period .we've had to look at it and listen to what's happened over the course of the last few months, is that first of all, can the government -h as it convinced itself that the economic lever of price structure alone can not remove the fortified wines and those that are ca using the trouble?

Can it not be controlled by pricing them so that the abuses can't take place, but leaving them on the shelf for those people in Manitoba's life sty le they refer to here that may want them for a particular reason. I assume they're not talking about a communal wine here.

But there cer tainly must be ap plic ations of fortified wines, say in restaurants and other particular eating habits people have required through the development of this life style referred to, where it's really a de pravation to remove that; they're not abusing it, they're probably prepared to pay the price of having the fortified wine -o r whenever you drink a sherry, I'm not a good enough epicurean of these matters or whatever you ca ll it to tell you exactly when you should drint a fortified sherry, but it comes either before or after the major part of the meal, which I assume they are referring to here.

Now these are going to be removed from the shelf. --(In terjection)- - Certainly. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHERNIACK: I wonder if he'd care to elucidate a little on the advantage of con trolling the quantity of usage of wines by fixing the price, which would seem to relate to the person's ability to pay a price rather than to .o ther factors in suggesting a cheap wine should cost a lot more as compared to, let's say, a hard liquor which also costs more. MR. CRAIK: Well, I'm . not sure I got the question exactly clear, Mr. Speaker.

But first of all I'm not advocating, and I don't think this is advocating increa sing the cheap wines, the regular wines, but the fortified wines which I assume are sherries and ports and so on. Then I would think that primarily the people who want to use those, and some of those I pre sume are included in the ban, that the people that want to use them use. them in sufficie nt moder ation that price is really not a real factor in their use. But, Mr.

Speaker, if we're w'rong we stand to be cor rected, but the important point we want to make here, trying to make, is that people are being deprived of something here by law simply bec ause it's not available rather than the economic deterrent that wc uld be put on by incr easing the price.

And we're saying that the deterrent would be sufficient - was incr ease of price alone to prevent or change this problem of the people, primarily the native people who have been abusing this evidently, because you introduced it in areas where there's a high native population, they've been able to get fairly chea p alcohol by buying these fortified wines.

But we're simply saying that price very likely is an economic deterrent that is going to either shift them and in all likelihood will reduce the amount of alcohol consumption, and we think that before you start banning you should try and prove out this instrument. In fact we endorse the fact that you do have the right to change the price structure to control abuses in alcohol.

We think it's an effective lever to do this and we would endorse it, but we certai nly find great difficulty in accepting the conclusion here that you should ban certa in grades and certain brands basic on alcohol content as a means of controlling the problem. We're quite surprised to find you come to this conc lusion and find it of course most difficult now to acce pt the fact that you have done this.

We dJ think it is some form of prohibition that ca n't be succ essful, that the balances that you are trying to achieve you seem somehow -I would gather from the Minister of Finance's statement to say that you would be segrega ting on economic grounds if you followed it.

I think the suggestion is there that you feel you'd be segregating these people on economic grounds but I don't think you would, because they'll shift -i f they really want to, they'll shift to other areas, and if a particular problem arises here, that you shouldn't deprive the right of people to get this if they can get it elsewhere, other provinces, to be able to buy it here, that they shouldn't be deprived of it simply because a particular group of people are abusing it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHE RNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the honourable member would permit another question. MR. SPEAKER: Question of cl arification, not further debate. MR. CHERNIACK: Clarification. MR. SPEAKER: Thank you. MR. CHERNIACK : That's fine. Does the honourable member not accept the fact that there are expensive fortified wines that have been on sale at the Liquor Commissions for years

May 21, 1974. 3703 CONCURRENCE (MR. CHERNIACK cont'd) ..... and that there are such expensive wines, fortified wines that are still available and I assume will continue to be available, but they 're of a much higher quality, is that not so ? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, undoubtedly they wouldn't be the ones that would be being abused, so ,p resumably they'll rem ain on the shelf.

We don't know what is going to remain on the shelf because you haven't told us, but you have told us that some brands are going to be removed from the shelf, presumably they're in the price spectrum and the high alcohol content spectrum that makes them desirable for the purposes of abuse, but you're now forcing people that bought that group of wines for table use, you're forcing -w ell, you're depriving them of it;

whereas you could have probably still allowed it by just changing the price structure. MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Flin Flon. MR. BARROW: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I only want to make one comment, and I hope the Honourable Minister would answer to my problem -o r to our problem - and that's vandal ism in the Flin Flon area. We had a prnel discussi on on this some few months ago, and con ditions are bad. Two weeks ago the Minister of Commerce and I attended a Chamber of Commerce meeting, and that was the outstanding beefs they had.

And they gave some ex amples of two young men after closing time deliberately causing $2 , 600 worth of glass damage. Another case of a girl frustrated for some reason smashing out three windows on Main Street. One of the weapons, Mr. Speaker , is using beer bottles to throw through plate glass windows. It's ironic, but Mayor Goetz makes a habit of picking up any loose beer. bottles on the street so they won't be used to cause destruction. He 's picked up eight in one day, eight beer bottles. The Chicken Villa run by a friend of mine won't stay open after the beer parlor closes.

The profit he makes isn't worth the chance of destruction that can be created through young hood lums. The Northern Cafe, a Chinese restaurant, taken over by these young gentlemen, forced to go out of business because decent people wouldn't go in this type of restaurant, they couldn't put up with it. So he's out of business. And what happens, Mr. Speaker? The RCMP do a good job. They catch them; they bring them up in court and they're remanded. They come from a poor environment and nothing happens.

But what does happen, the police become very frustrated and sooner or later I'd assume they wouldn't even bother picking up this type of law breaker. I believe quite sincere ly in doing your thing, but when this thing interferes with other people then, Mr. Speaker , someone has to step in. All I'm asking, Mr. Speaker , is for the Honourable Minister to step into this and make it a little tougher for these young punks taking over the Town of Flin Flon. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for St. James. MR . MINAKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I, like my colleague, the Honour able Member from Riel, would like to make a few comments at this time after having a brief opportunity to look at the Attorney-General's statement with regards to the policy of pricing of liquor in the Manitoba Liquor Control Commis sion stores. And I am somewhat disturbed in that my initial reaction in listening to the Attorney-General's statement is that we are on the roa d to staged prohibition in our province.

It started back some six months ago in the north, that a decisi on was made at that time; we didn't know whether it was the policy of the administrator, the Commission Chairman, or whether it was the policy of the Attorney General and the government that such a prohibition would take place. And we never really did get a precise answer to that question. Now we have before us a statement that in effect immedia tely there will be a ban of certa in types of wines in our liquor stores for the province as a whole.

And I suggest, Mr: Speaker, that the problem doesn 't lie in the fact that this alcohol is available to our people ; I don't see how you can legisla te against alcoholism , and it would appear that the government is attempting to do this by restri cting the availability. And I'm not an expert on alcoholism, but I have talked to people who have had the misfortune to experience such and also to be involved with people that work in that particular field, and they have all indicated that pro hibition isn't the answer to the problem, that re ally it 's a rehabilitation problem that we have and an educating problem.

And I have to commend the government to some degree that they have had an education type of program in adverti sements, etc. in this regards to try and educate the drinker and we hope that there will be more of this. But I do not believe that by censorship really that is what we have before us, Mr. Speaker, that all of a sudden the government has decided that our people who live in Manitoba

3704 May 21, 1974. CONCURRENC E (MR. MINAKER cont'd) ....• cannot have a cert ain, particular item because they feel that they can eliminate problems by taking it off the market. I am against censor ship in that type, or method. I believe that the individual should be well informed of what consequences, or what he is about to see if it's a m ovie ,o r what he is about to drink if it's a drink, that he be well aware of the consequences, or what he might experience if he should enter a show or have a drink, and give him the right to refuse if he so desires.

But to turn around in our socie ty today and say that you can't have it because you live in Manitoba, but if you happen to live out at St. Laurent and you walk across the border three or four miles, or St. Lazare, that you can legally have it in thi s loca tion. Re ally, what we are saying to our citizens that do enjoy pos sibly this type of fortified wine, that you can't have it any more; you're not allowed to have it if you live in Manitoba because we have a problem in cert ain parts of our society. Really that is not the answer in my opinion, Mr.

Speaker, because it still goes back to educating the drinker, and also the rehabilitation of those particular drinkers \\ho have a problem and have a sickness, and by prohibition or censor ship you will not achieve this, and re ally, all I can see is that we will probably influence to some degree the breaking of law by having people bring in the particular brand they may like to drink across the border and one could suggest, it 's not as extreme as what has happened, or in this policy, that those people who like to drink sherry or port - and I have found myself, I think last year I bought two bottles of sherry, and the prime reason for buying it was at Christmas time because we would have the odd person who dropped over, I might say senior in age, who preferred a small drink of sherry, and now I would presume that that will no longer be made available to these people.

MR . SPEAKER : Order please. MR. MINAKER : I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that one of the alternatives would be that we give people ID cards and they might be allowed one or two bottles of this fortified wine a year, if they got their card punched at the Liquor Commission. So that that is of a less censor ship than what we're looking at at the prese nt time as a policy here. I concur with the suggestion that we charge based on the cost per ounce of alcohol.

I think that that would be somewhat of a deterr ent that if this brand is available at a slightly higher cost, that the individual can choose and make his se lection. I am not a wine connoisseur but I know that people drink wine, not necess arily how much it costs, but for the flavour and the aroma, and the general liking of having a glass of wine.

Because there are a certain perc entage of our socie ty, and there will always be a cer tain perce ntage of our socie ty, who have what I have heard it descri bed as, a sickness, that the majori ty of the population has to suf fer, based on the decision of the governm ent that they will remove a certain type of product from our shelves, yet they will in turn allow another product with the same particular chemical, or chemistry make-up, in it but of stronger concentration to stay on the shelf, then I say this is sort of a hypocritical approach to the problem, and if one is taking off a relatively low-cost item because it happens to have a higher conc entration, isn't the answer because the people who are requiring this particular type of item or product, will get it in other sources, they'll either get it illegally, or they will harm their health by getting it in some other manner, and it all reflects back to the problem that it 's one of re habilitation.

For some rea son our Commission feels it 's great to pat itself on the back and say that we've liberalized drinking in Manitoba; we've made it available in the beverage room for the low income families and the young people, so that they can also have the same type of facility and services that they would norma lly have to pay for at a higher rate in the Liquor Lounges. So they brag about this in one statement, and then they turn around and pat themselves on the back for saying that compared to other provi nces we're doing wonderfully well, based on license suspensions.

For some reason they feel that they are going to overcome this problem of alcoholism by suspending licenses and closer guarding, and I complime nt them for guarding and making sure that the laws are followed but what are we trying to prove ? One one hand, we're trying to liberaliz e the laws and let more people drink, younger people drink, and when we have a problem with a certain perc entage or certain person in our society, we, okay let's censor the whole thing on that particular source that we feel is a source of the problem. Yet in my opinion, Mr.

Speaker , that is not the source of the problem , it relates back to the individual perso n who decides he wants to drink, or may even be compelled to drink because of his sickness.

May 21, 1974. 3705 CONCURRENCE (MR. MINAKER cont'

d) We have to educate the new and young drinker and the old drinker , and we also have to provide more of a rehabilitation type of service for the problem drinker that we have today, and the future problem drinker which we are going to have and we look at the revenue that comes from the Commission this year, we're looking at some $42 million.

I've tried to zero in on that amount of money that is put toward rehabilitation, and I would say it is probably less than a million dollar s, yet we can take this revenue and use it for other sourc es, yet the actual revenue, or where we get this revenue from and the problems it cr eates for cer tain individuals, we can't find the money to pour back in and try and help these people out. Mr. Speaker, I'm sorely disappointed that the government has taken this approach to stage prohibition, or censorship, because I feel that will not give them the answer they're looking for.

I would suggest that by increa sing the price that they will get the same effect that they claim in their comm ent that the Commis sion has found a 53 perce nt decrease in con sumption of pure alcohol. Well, it's only natural if they have to pay more money for a bottle that has less alcohol in it, that they will consume less alcohol.

It's sort of half a dozen of one, six of another, whether you raise the price of 26 oz. , or you take it off the market and make the individual drink 52 oz. in order to get the same alcoholic consumption, because if that individual needs that alcohol; or he thinks he needs that alcohol, in his system he will get it by consuming a greater volume.

But the average individual who enjoys the fortified wine, or the low priced sherry, and they are, I imagine, some of our more senior citizens and our low income people, if they enjoy this type of particular drink, I'm sure that the major ity of them don't dri nk bottles and bottles at one Sitting but maybe a glass or two, and now what we're saying, or the government is saying, you no longer can have this privilege if you live in Manitoba because we think that is the cause of alcoholism in our province. I suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that it 's not and that the governm ent reviews its policy and takes a better attitude toward education and rehabilitation, where we believe the answer, or part of the answer, to solving this problem lies. MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre. MR . J. R. BOYCE (W innipeg Centre) : Mr. Speaker , I do n't want to enter the debate on the specific points of alcohol and alcoholism at the moment. I think it's better covered under the Minister of Health and Social Development.

But I wonder if the Attorney-General coul d perhaps take as notice and have someone in his department address themselves to a problem which I see arising in our society, and that's the prolifera tion of private police forces. The problems which are creeping in I would suggest is best epitomized by the Province of Quebec where some of the figures show that the expenditures being made by the soci ety for private polic e forces exceed the total provincial and City of Montreal budgets.

We have before us an item for Concurrence of some 16 millions of dollars for law enforc ement and the ad ministration of justice within the province, and I would ask the Attorney-General if he could perhaps have someone addr ess themselves to this problem. Historica lly we have had such private police forces as the railway polic e, assoc iated with the two main railways, and of course Pinkerton's, and other such organizations.

But one of the things that is, I guess, that bothers me, is as a reside nt fundamentalist we can only have people in our soci ety interfering with others ):ly the sanction of law, and under the pro tection of law, a."ld if you go back down to the fundamental of that, we get into the re alm of habeas corpus, that a man has the right to walk free in our socie ty without the interference of other s, unless it is by sanction of law and done within the protection of law. This of cour se is entering into the area referred to by the Member for St.

James with reference to alcoho lism as the provinc e moves to provide faciliti es for people apprehended under the Intoxicated Persons Detention Act, that there will be people who are involved in holding people in custody ; albeit by gentle persuasion, nevertheless I am apprehensive about some of the nuances of this.

I think that the public should be aware that when we expend public moneys it is rather obvious; we have some $1 6 million which is drawn to our attention, but nevertheless we lose sight of the fact that in such establishments as Hudsons Bay and Eaton' s, and all the other department stores that set up surveillance systems, and quasi police forces, that these costs are rather difficult to isolate, but nevertheless they are costs which come out of the same pockets. The Member for 8>¥an River mentioned that we had to perhaps look at putting more

37 06 May 21, 1974. CONCURRENC E (MR. BOYCE cont'd) .•..• moneys into the conc ept which seems to have gone by the Board in North America but is cr eeping back in that we have to put police protection back on the streets, Perhaps we should look at this total picture of what it is co sting soc iety and see if we can't redirect some of the dollars to move in the dir ection suggested by the Member from Swan River that some of the dollars directed to the prevention of crime and misbehaviour within the co mmunity, would be dollars well invested in the public interest.

But I think to iso late this we have to be in poss ession of more knowledge than I perso nally have at the prese nt time, as a member of this Legislature, and I would suggest that perhaps the Attorney-General's Department is the departm ent that should perhaps come up with the informa tion so that the members can be apprised of what is happening in the total police involvement in our community. It is1of course, becoming mor e and more difficult to attract people to the police forces , because of public attitude in the past 10 years or so. But I would suggest, Mr.

Speaker , that this attitude is changing, that the polic e are addres sing themselves to their new role in socie ty. The role of a polic eman was well defined, oh I would suggest up to the middle 50s, but sub sequent to the 50s, and especially during the 60s, and the sit-ins and the confrontations, and all the things that took plac e in our socie ty, the lot of a policeman was truly an unhappy one because they knew not where they stood vis-a- vis the government, or the soc iety itself.

But now it seems with the establishment of such things as police commis sions and law reform commissions, the relationship between the two being that they are re -addressing themselves to what the role of a policeman is within the community as not only a law enforce ment figure, which he became by and large from the 1950's, but a law prevention person in the community. I can only recall perso nally my experience in having grown up in the City of Wi nnipeg and being a mischievous Irishman perhaps, much of my learning was done as a result of the involvement with some of our Wi nnipeg's finest.

I think of specifically a gentle man by the name of Inspector Montgomery, who I bumped into when I was a young lad, who was instrumental in helping me per sonally by the swift kick of a size 9 boot that sometimes a person should behave a little differently than I chose at that particular mom ent, but neverthe less through the years we dev eloped a relationship that I learned a lot from, and I know many people in my particular generation relied on the old beat cop, as a member of the com munity. I think, Mr.

Speaker, in closi ng that I would ask the Attorney-General once more to perhaps have someone in his department gather together the informa tion necessa ry that the members of the Assembly can see just exactly what the total cost of policing insofar as law enfor cement in the community is cost ing us today. • . . . . continued on next page

May 21, 1974 3707 CONCURRENCE MR. SPEAKER: Th e Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. L, R. (BUD) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): M r.

Speaker , I was particularly interested in the remarks made by the Honourable Member for Fl in Flon because he made reference to a subject and a situation to which I have made reference myself, namely, the difficulty that the police have, and the courts have today, in dealing with ce rtain types of offences , largely in the field of juvenile offences , and the degree to which the police themselves feel handicapped and worthless insofar as trying to enforce laws and behaviour in that area of the comm unity is con cerned. I want to ask the Attorney-General, Mr.

Speaker, whether he does not think that some of the difficulty lies in the provision under the Child Welfare Act for a review board which deals with decisions of the Family Court. I raised this question during the considera tion of the honour able gentleman's estimates , and I am raising it again now on this Concurrence motion because I would be interested in his response to it , or at least his application to the question. Perhaps he's already looked into it; if he has, then I would appreciate his views and his comme nts on it.

I've had it suggested to me that one of the reasons why the courts , and the machinery of our courts and our police departments, find it difficult to deal effectively and definitively with the problem of juvenile offenders is that the Child Welf are Act makes it possi ble for a review board to sit in judgment on the decisions of the Family Court or Family Courts and to ov erturn those judgm ents. The incongruousness of the situation is further heightened by the fact that one of the members of the review board is supposed to be, I believe, a judge of the Family Court.

So what happens is that you have one judge of the Fa mily Court , with some collea gues, sitting in on the judgment of another judge of the Family Court, which seems to me to pose a rather incongruous situation. It looks at least on the surface like an inefficiency and an anomaly , and I would appre ciate some explanation and some reasoning for that kind of proc edure.

But basically whether or not ther e's a Family Court judge sitting in on a decision of another Family Court judge, the cr ux of the problem that I'm posi ng to the Attorney-General, and which I'm suggesting may be crucial in the whole pro cess of dea ling with juvenile offenders effectively, is this stipulation under the Child W elfare Act that sets up a review board and not only enables but indeed empower s that review board to sit in review and judgment of the decisions of the Fam ily Court.

What happens is that in many instances the decision of the Fam ily Court , I am told , is ov erturned , re medial measures , o r even punitive measures, prescri bed by the Fa mily Court to deal with specific offenders with whom the police are having trouble, such as those referred to by my honourable friend from Flin Fl on, are oftentimes, I'm told, judged relatively arbitrarily by the re view board and ov erturned and cancelled.

As a consequence the work and the effort and the study that the Family Court has put into deal ing with that particular offender is neutralized and emascula ted and the offender often goes scot-free when he or she should have some kind of re medial action taken against them and imposed on them. I'm told that the Fam ily Court for the most part only sends juvenile offenders to detention homes after they have exhausted every other means of dea ling with them.

I can't vouch for that because I'm not a lawyer and I have no connection with the Fa mily Court, but I'm told that it 's the general rule that the court would only take a juvenile and incarcerate him or her in a deten tion home if the members of the co urt felt that all other avenues of deal ing with that particular offender had been exhausted, that all other avenues had been frustrated and had met with failure, then they take the reluctant decision to send them for corrective confinement and tra ining in many instances to detention homes. But they know why they're making that deci sion.

They're making that deci sion on the basis of substantial investigation and substantial exposure to that particular problem. The complaints that many members of the legal profession have voic ed to me - or I'll modify that statement, Mr.

Speaker , and say the complaints that some members of the legal profession have expresse d to me, have to do with what they feel is the unfairness and the inequity of hav ing a Fa mily Court--excuse me - having a review board then com e in to a situation, which to all intents and purposes is a new situation to them, come in cold, and make a judgment overruling, overturning, what the Fam ily Court has been working on and studying and applying itself to. Further to that ther e is no appeal, as I understand it , from the dec isions of the review board.

If the Fam ily Court decides that in the interests of society, in the interests of a co mmunity, in the interests of an individual, that individual should be directed to some cor rective program or corre ctive in stitution and the review board comes along and turns that dec ision over , there is no appe al, as I understand it , from that re view board, which in effect becomes a co urt of last resort.

3708 May 21 , 1974 CONCU RRENCE (MR SHERMAN cont'

d) So I would welcome the Attorne y-Ge ner al' s addres sing himself to this particular situation which I think is an anomaly in our legal system, and I would appreciate his com ments on the subj ect. I know that in many cases when the review board interferes with a decision of the Family Court - and I use that term "interfere" advisedly - the new decision is made to se nd the offending party to a different institu tion than that prescribed by the Family Court.

In several of those instanc es, in an appre ciable number of those instanc es, I am told there are often difficulties for the officer s, for the officials accompanying the offender who is being transf erred to some kind of institution and escapes occur , and that re sults in all kinds of further difficulty for the police, for the institutional officers and for the reside nts of an are a or a comm unity themselves. The situation is not fictional and not isolated.

I'm advised that these things do occur , and do occur largely because of a well- meaning and well-intentioned ignorance on the part of the review board, a well- meaning and well- intentioned unfamiliarity with the character and temperam ent of the offender, with his or her background, and with all the other aspects of the cases with which the Family Court is familiar.

The review board all too often is not familiar with those circu mstanc es, with that background, and they prescribe a different kind of institution, or a different kind of treatment or techniq ue, or even a different kind of accom pani ment in transfer to an institution, and it results in, as I say, escape s, difficulties , as saults, all kinds of prob lems that the Family Co urt foresaw and tried to head off in the first place.

In dealing with the subj ect first during the estimates of the Attorney-Ge neral, I suggested to him that it would be an intere sting exercise for he and I and some of us to look into the num ber of decisions made by the Fam ily Co urt that have been overruled by the review board in a given period of time in the past, let's say, during the past twelve months , and check and see what the resu lt has been in terms of criminal activities by the juvenile offenders involved.

I think that all of us would be interes ted in that kind of a comparison, and I think w e might find some in teres ting statistics should we look at the number of cases overturned by the review board and the res ulting crim inal activities spawned by the decision. I want to emphasize that I don't wish to be critical of the intentions of the re view board, Mr. Speaker. I am sur e that members of the review board are , as I' ve said, well- intentioned citizens who want to give the offender every br eak.

The problem is that many of us in many situations want to bend over backwards and go beyond the point of reas onabi lity in giving oppor tunities to people who eon't want to meet the res ponsib ilities of those opportunities and of socie ty. The problem is that the Family Court looks at these things, deals with the case in toto, d eals with the offender in toto, and prescribes a course of action that res ults from a total study of the situation ,

whereas the review board oftentimes comes into the situation not knowing all of the circum stanc es , and wishing to give the offender every opportunity, makes the mis take of going too far.

In the beginning we all want to give the offender every opportunity; in the beginning the Family Co urt wants to give him or her every opportunity, but when those opportllilities are exhausted, when the re sult has been frustration, and when the resu lt has been a lack of apprec iation for the opportunities given the offender with the re sulting effect of more law-br eaking and more difficulty for socie ty, then the Family Court often comes down fairly hard and prescribes the kind of action, rem edial and punitive , that it deems is warranted. This is the difficulty in the situation as I see it, Mr.

Speaker , having acted on all the known facts of the case the Family Co urt is then subjected to the well-m eaning intentions of an agency or an authority that all too often does not have acc ess to all the facts of the case.

So I pose that question for the Attonney-General as to just how much difficulty in this whole area of offence, and particularly juvenile offence, could be contained and could be reduced by having a look at the review board and at its makeup and at its powers, having a look in fact at those sections of the Child Welfare Act which pres cribe its existen ce, and perhaps introducing some new teeth in the legis lation that if nothing else provide an avenue at leas t of appeal from a review board deci sion. MR. DEPU TY SPEAKER: The Honourable Le ader of the Opposition. MR. SPIV AK: Mr.

Speaker , I rise on the Concurrence motion to express an opinion and a few thoughts concer ning the Manitoba Human Rights Com mis sion. Before I do that I would like to deal with two matters that have been dealt with already in this House this afternoon, and to indicate a point of view that I think has to be expres sed. One would deal with the Hono urable

May 21, 1974 3709 CONCU RRENCE (MR. SPIV AK cont' d) . . . . • Member from Winnipeg Ce ntre' s remarks with res pect to the problems of the private police force and generally the problems of law and order within the pro vince. Mr. Speaker, I would offer a suggestion to the governmen t, which I think is a valid one because I think in discus sing this matter we are entering into a debate in which the facts are really not known by the members of the govern ment, and by the members of the Le gisl ature. I think we've prob ably re ached the point, Mr.

Spe aker , where there would be need, and the appropriate time I would think would be in between the sessio ns, this sessi on and the next, for a legislative commission of inquiry to deal with the problems of law and order within this pro vince, to deal with the problems that arise as a res ult of the private police forces being employed , and the symptom that that indicates of the problems with respect to polic ing in the urban areas of this provinc e, the problems of the north, problems of the rural ar eas.

I think the Honourable Member from Fort Garry has dealt with the problem of rehabilita tion and with sentenc ing , but involved in this is the whole que stion of penal refoqn, and it deals to a large extent with the problems of law and order; and the problems, Mr. Speaker, that face this problem with res pect to a whole host of conditions and situations that must be altered if there is to be corr ection to some of the problems that exist in our society today. I think the need for a legislative inquiry is only , Mr.

Speaker, to be in a position to indicate in sort of a definitive way the areas of concern and pinpoint the particular highlights of the areas of con cern and the dire ction. ·I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that if that was undertaken that someone like the head of the Winnipeg City Police Com mission, including the Chief of Pol ic e, would be in a position to pre sent before such a com mittee their views so that there could be some knowledge.

We'd have the opportunity for those who have be en involved in the rehabilitation field to pre sent their views; we' d have the opportunity to be able to gain an insight and inform ation, because, Mr.

Speaker, I'm not satisfied from the prese ntation of the Attorne y-Ge neral, from reall y the wasted years from the time of the White Paper on Corr ections that was furnished by the governme nt - and I say they are wasted years - that very much has bee n accomplished and that the government is really knowledgeable even of what the problems are, and I think that if anything we should fulfill the function that we have as legislators which is to rec ommend to government the actions to be undertaken reco gnizing that ·gove rnment will have to execute it.

So therefore, Mr� Speaker, I would think that this would be a worthwhile activity and one which is borne out by the speeches that have been pre sented here today. With re spect to the Attorney-Ge ner al's statement on liquor lic encing policy. Mr. Speaker , I think it is well known and acce pted that cigarettes that contain a high degree of nicotine can be, and have bee n, re sponsib le for cancer , for lung canc er. This is I think under stood, and it's agreed and acc epted to be the fact. The governme nt has regulatory power. In the case of the Liquor Co mmission they have monopoly power.

But the government has always regulatory power to ban in the public interest the sale of anything that would be harmful to health, dangerous to the society. I have to suggest , Mr. Speaker , that the actions that the governme nt have undertaken, or appear to be undertaking, in connection with its use of its monopoly power , seem to be in direct contradiction in the principles that motivate them in this particular situation, with re spect to its regulatory power ability, and I think that ther e is a contradiction that is pretty signific ant, and one which puts into question this particular action.

I'm not suggesting , Mr. Speaker , that there isn't a prob lem , but I mean, I wonder whether the governme nt has r eached the point that it is now making the decision s for everyone, or whether they're going to allow the deci sions to be made by others. If the governm ent says that it' s in the interests of the quality of life in Manitoba and in the interes t of the individual for this to be banned , in other words to protect the individual from himself, then surely, Mr.

Speaker, the government should be protecting the individual from being allowed to purchase cigarettes that will be without question harmful to health and will likely cause his death. Yet, Mr. Speaker, we don 't have that regulatory power being exercised by the government, and I think this contra diction is there. I think the monopo ly power that the government is exerci sing is the reas on why the governme nt doesn't use this in the same light as I have suggested.

But I think that their res ponsibilities with the res pect to the way in which they exercise that monopoly power has to follow in the same as they would eal with regulation of the purchase of cigare ttes or the sale of cigar ettes in Manitoba.

3710 May 21, 1974 CONCURRENCE (MR, SPIVAK cont'

d) I rose in this debate, Mr. Speaker , to speak on the Manitoba Human Right Commis sion and I'd like to, if I may, deal in the main with that and I would look forward to the re sponse by the Attorney-General. Mr. Speaker , when we talk about the Manitoba Human Rights Co mmission, we talk about something, or a Co mmi ssion, or a body, that almost repre sents motherhood to every politician. Ci vil liberties are so mething that every politician is concerned about; the protection of rights exists in this Legislature, and in the House of Co mmons.

The res ponsibi lity is ours to insure that there is political and ci vil liberty. But, Mr. Speaker, I think if we examine the history of the Human Rights Com mission from the time of its cr eation in this Legi slature, we would have to que stion at this point, not the intent, but we would have to question the resu lt, and we would have to say, Mr. Speaker , that there are changes that must be introduced if the original con cept that was re spons ible for the development of the Human Rights Commi ssion is to be carried through.

In the report of progr ess of the Manitoba Human Rights Com missi on dated Dec ember 31, 197 2, the first sentence states: "As a socie ty evolves there is a constant effort on the part of its members to find ways to evaluate its progre ss. " Mr. Speaker, I would apply that with respect to the Manitoba Human Rights Com mission and say that as the Manitoba Human Rights Com mission has evolved, there must be a con stant effort on the part of the members of this Legislature to find ways to evaluate its progress. I don't think that that' s been done, Mr.

Speaker, As a matter of fact i would like to address myself to that because I believe that the time has come for so me very fundamental changes to take place if we are going to carry out the original intent :md purpo se. Mr. Speaker, the problems are simple. The Manitoba Human Rights Co mmission lacks a structure to allow it to operate effectively. In some cases , Mr. Speaker , memb er s appear to have been appoin ted who have neither the interest nor the experience in Human Rights. Mr.

Speaker, there is no questio n that an error was made in its cr eation in allowing the Co mmission to be both the investigatory body and the ju dicial body which would make the deci sion with res pect to a complaint. I think, Mr. Speaker, this becomes one of the basic problems right from the very beginning , becaus e the honourab le members opposi te when introduc ing this bill were not prepared to follow the example and the experience of Ontario but really initiated new ground; in the course of doing this have provided what is an impo ssible situation and that is, Mr.

Speaker, to have the people who are doing the inve stigating be the actual people who will do the decis ion. Now the Human Rights Com mission is an administrative body, it's a se mi- judicial body, and has a semi- judicial function, and ther e is no way, Mr. Speaker, that the people who are involved in review ing a complaint should be put in the position of having to judge that compla int. Mr.

Speaker, therefore the function has to a ce rtain extent been stifled as a re sult of the difficulties that have ari sen between its investigatory function and its function as a semi judicial body, and the cases that took place, Mr. Speaker, or that have been appealed, have indicated that there is a problem of prejudgme nt and bias that the courts have found against the commission itself. Now , Mr. Speaker , there is I believe solutions to the problems, and I'm going to bring this forward as concr ete suggestions with respect to the Manitoba Human Rights Com mis sion.

The Honourable Attorney-G eneral suggested that ther e may be amendments this session to the Human Rights Co mmiss ion Act, and if those amendments are to come forward I would hope they would contain some of the suggestions that I would bring forward today. First, Mr. Speaker, I beli eve that the Human Rights Commission should in fact be res ponsi ble to the Legisla ture and to the Legisla tive Assem bly. This is not so mething new, it' s been suggested by mys elf and others before. Bu t in saying that, Mr.

Speaker, I believe that the appoint ments to the Human Rights Co mmission should be made by this Legislature in the same way as the appointment of the Ombudsman is made, and that Mr. Speaker , is a very important distinction.

I am suggesting that because we are dealing with a semi- judicial body, dealing in an area of sensiti vity, in concern with res pect to our socie ty, that the appointments made by the Lieutenant-Governor-in -Cou ncil , nevertheless we should follow the procedure that was followed in the appointment of the Ombuds man , and this then would make the members of the Com mission res ponsi ble to the Legi slature. I would like to , Mr. Speaker , if I may, refer

May 21, 1974 371 1 CONCU RRENC E (MR. SPIVAK cont'd ) .... . to the

section in the Ombudsm

an Act with re spect to the appoint ment. No. 2 (1) of the Ombudsman Act states that the Li eutenant-Go vernor- in- Co uncil shall on the reco mmendation of a special committee of the Ass embly appoint a Canadian citizen as Ombudsman for the Province of Manitoba. Now, Mr. Speaker, this Hous e, or the parties in this House, were capable of agree ing on the appointment of an Ombudsman as a re sult of negotiations, and I would think that the appointment , Mr.

Speaker, of the Human Rights Commission should not be left to the govern ment but rather should be left to this Legisla ture, if in fact the Human Rights Com mission is to be re sponsib le to the Legis lature, and I start with that pre mise, Mr. Speaker , and that is a fundamental change to what the government has operated under in the past, and that is made in as a concrete way of avoiding some of the problem areas that I think exist as a re sult of the appointments that have be en made, and the way in which it was operated before. Mr.

Speaker, it 's neces sary that there be a structure or system set up for proc edures with re spect to the way in which complaints are dealt with, and I suggest that my review and investigation of this has indicated that no proper system has existed in the last little while, and this has led to several problem areas. These areas are sensitive areas, Mr.

Speaker, and I don't think it serves the public inter est to debate them in this House but to indicate that there are probl ems, and I think the Attorney-General is the first one , or will be one of the first to admit that there have been problems and there is a necessi ty of change. I'm suggesting, Mr. Speaker, both in terms of the appointments and the way in which the Commission should operate, that the changes that we are proposing would have a system set up, and a structure set up , whereby complaints would be handled in a determined way and so that justice will be deemed to have been done for everyone. Mr.

Speaker , I think it' s important and esse ntial that the appointments be made of people who have a very deep and re al interest in Human Rights, and who have the experience and knowledge to be able to handle what is a major re sponsib ility, and with all due re spect to the honourable members opposite, and without in any way taking away from the appointments that have been made, it would seem to me that the review of the appointments would indicate that there is an 'improve ment that could arise if you commit yourself, Mr.

Speaker , to the appoint ment of people who are experienced in the field of civil liberties and Human Right$. Mr. Speaker, the Executive Dire ctor who was appointed should be a politic.al. He should be competent in the area, and his appointment , Mr. Speaker, should be undertaken by a Commissi on appointed by this Legis lature, and he should be res ponsible to that Com mission, and he should be in a position, Mr. Speaker, to answer dir ectly to a Com mittee of the Legislature as well as the Commission itself. In this way, Mr.

Speaker, we would be in a position to protect the public 's interest rather than to have the Human Rights Com mission as a mysterious kind of body that so mehow or other deals in the fields of civil liberties and takes care of specific complaints , and somehow. or other processes them through and settles them to the satisfaction of everyone , because I don't believe that that is re ally happening , Mr. Speaker.

As a matter of fact, if anything, there has been a lethargy that has existed within the Commission that it has had the effect of di scour aging and disillusi oning many of the people who have been involved in this particular field. Now I want to draw attention to the way in which the Ontario Human Rights Com mission operates to indicate an alternati ve, an alternative approach, and suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that in the way in which the Ontario Co mmission operates under its Act there are improvements to our Act that could be made, and there are many of the procedures that can be adopted to assis t in car rying out the Human Rights Co mmiss ion in a better way than it has in the past. Mr. Speaker , in Ontario a complaina nt contacts an officer of the Commission. Now if the compl ainant has a legal basis for a claim, the complaina nt must put it in writing and it must be signed by the complainant. The officer investigates the complaint and attempts a concil iation with the help of a concil iation specialist.

Now at thi s point, Mr. Speaker , the Commission has not been involved. If we were to follow the proc edures here , Mr. Speaker, I think we would find that the Co mmissi on would be involved almost immediately. If no concili ation can be reached, the officer in consultation with his regional super visor in Ontario , and with the director of the Commission, decides whether the case should be prese nted to the Commission, and if they make that decision, the hearings will be closed. So the first hearing , Mr. Speaker , before the Co mmission af ter a complaint has bee n made, and an attempt at

371 2 May 21, 1974 CONCU RRENCE (MR. SPIVAK cont' d) . . . . . conciliation has been made with re spect to the matter , will be determined and heard by the Com mis sion in clo sed session. The Members of the Commissi on in Ontario are appointed by Orde r- in- Co uncil, and it has been an unwritten stipulation , Mr. Speaker, and I think the appointments will stand up to this condition that I have suggested , that each member has a re cognized interest and re putation , experi enc e and background , in the are a of Human Rights. I do not believe that this can be said about the pre sent Commission, or the past appo intments. Mr. Speaker, the Commiss ion appointe es ar

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	30-1-133
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	30th 1st hansardpdf 133.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	8e15ede956ef9b8fa567aa1f0e594ba6a86e1b13

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