Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 47B (32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-47b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - GOVERNMENT SERVICES MR. CHAIRMAN, Harry M. Harapiak (The Pas): I will call the Committee to order. We are on Government Services 2.(

d) Leased Accommodations:

(1) Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. HARRY GRAHAM (Virden): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the leasing the government does, do they follow a very flexible form or can the Minister give me a general rundown on what the average is on leasing? -(ln terjection)- No, terms, three, five, long term, short term, or is it all variable? MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. SAMUEL USKIW (Lac du Bonnet): Well, Mr. Chairman, the bulk of the leases that I have expe rienced through the fixing of my signature on the contracts, I believe were three, five years, mostly three years, some one year, a number of extensions.

I would think three years is quite normal, judging from the track record anyway. MR. GRAHAM: In the urban area here of Winnipeg, in the past two or three years, has the market been very stable or is it starting to go up again? MR. USKIW: My impression is that the market should be rather soft at the moment and probably a few good deals could be had if one were looking. I'm not sure if that's what we've done in the last number of months. The deputy confirmed that there is a fair amount of office space in the area that is vacant. MR.

GRAHAM: Has there been any significant drop ping of leases and picking up new ones occurring? MR. USKIW: I don't recall, Mr. Chairman, too many in that category. A lot of renewals, most of them, as I recall it were incremental increases reflecting infla tion and so on. The odd one were significant increases but usually there were special circumstances arising out of those - (lnterjection)- yes, and mostly in rural areas where the larger percentage of increases are taking place. MR. GRAHAM: Now, those were the two or three concerns I had in that capacity. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(d)

(1) Salaries-pass; 2.(d)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 2.(

e) Employee Housing, 2.(e)

(1) Salaries-pass; 2.(e)

(2) Other Expenditures. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: In the field of Employee Housing, is that scattered or isolated areas that the housing is most prevalent in? MR. USKIW: Well, the bulk of them are related to Highways and Natural Resources and a lot of it is remote community. I could give the member an idea just by reading off a number of them: Anama Bay, Ashern, Asessippi, Bissett. There are some southern locations: Birds Hill, Boissevain, Brandon, Brochet, Carman, Cranberry Portage, Cross Lake, Dauphin, Easterville, Erik sdale, Falcon Lake, Garland, Gillam, God's Narrows, Grand Beach, Grand Rapids.

A lot of them are resource-related, the bulk of them I believe are in Natural Resources, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: Also, in the field of Employee Hous ing and I presume it would come under this area, and it is in the field of moving of employees. At the present time, the government pays the full cost of moving? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the departments in ques tion pay those costs. We are not involved in that area. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 2.(e)

(2) Other Expenditures pass; 2.(

f) Security Services: Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, this is the field where there is a very significant increase in the Salaries and it's in response to the change in program that was announced by the Minister. I would like to ask him how many additional staff have been added in response to the advertisement that was placed in the papers some time ago. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, there are 46 new staff man years. A number of those are in the process of gaining their employment or a number of applications for those positions are just about completed and approved.

The incremental costs to the department will be somewhere in the order of $300,000 or $400,000 for this fiscal year. 217 6 MR. GRAHAM: The Minister still hasn't given me the number that have been taken on. MR. USKIW: I'm sorry. Perhaps, I did not catch the whole question. Could the member repeat his question? MR. GRAHAM: I was wondering how many of those that applied for the job that closed on the 3rd of March, how many have been hired? MR. USKIW: The Winnipeg region had 429 applica tions; 33 positions are to be filled in Winnipeg and that process is virtually complete. MR.

GRAHAM: Of those 33 successful applicants, how many of them were previously employed by firms that ceased to hold contracts with the government now? MR. USKIW: 7, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: 7 out of 33. That seems a rather low

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 number in relationship to the total number. Of the other 26, had they all had previous experience in security? MR. USKIW: The bulk of them, Mr. Chairman, as I understand it, were involved in either security, mil itary or police work. There were a number of criteria established and one additional criteria was added to the selection process over the standard criteria and that was the currently employed in government facility criteria, so that if all things were equal, a person that was employed through the contract arrangement had that added factor in his or her favour. MR.

GRAHAM: Would the Minister provide us with the criteria that was used for the selection of those positions? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, there were 11 points that we addressed ourselves to, the first one being, pre vious security experience, minimum of two years; public relations experience; first aid training; fire eva cuation procedures; high school education: physi cally fit; military experience; police experience; French language oral; report writing; security training and then the additional point that was added was, cur rently employed government faciity. MR.

GRAHAM: Of the 33 positions that have been filled in the Winnipeg region, are all of them bilingual? MR. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: Could the Minister indicate how many were bilingual, seeing as how French was one of the criteria used? MR. USKIW: Out of the 83 that were interviewed, only five qualified in that sense. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 2.(f)

(1) Salaries-pass. The Member for Niakwa. MR. ABE KOVNATS (Niakwa): One additional ques tion, were all five of the bilingual applicants hired? MR. USKIW: No, they didn't qualify on other grounds in the competition, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2. (f)( 1) Salaries-pass. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, out of those five, how many were hired? MR. USKIW: None at all, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: So none of the 33 then met the criteria of having French? MR. USKIW: No, no, I didn't say that, Mr. Chairman. I said that none of them have the bilingual capacity.

Those that did have that capacity were disqualified for other reasons in the criteria, so that we couldn't match them up in order to include them. They didn't qualify in many of the other points that had to be met. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, the 83 that were inter viewed out of 429, there were five that had the French qualification and none of those five were hired. MR. USKIW: None of those five were qualified pursu ant to the criteria that was laid down, although they had that one component qualification. MR. GRAHAM: So none of those five were hired.

So out of the 33 that were hired in the Winnipeg region, then none of them have the French qualification. MR. USKIW: That is correct, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: That is all I wanted on that. Now of the other 13, for out of the Winnipeg region, could the Minister indicate for what area those 13 were? MR. USKIW: Yes, we're dealing with 9 positions in the Brandon area and we had 78 applications for those 9 positions, 26 were identified for interview and the interview process is now under way. MR. GRAHAM: It's still under way? MR. USKIW: For that group, yes. MR.

CHAIRMAN: I would remind the members that we are being taped for Hansard and you should give me time to recognize you so we can recognize you in the book tomorrow. MR. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, there are still 7 more someplace in rural Manitoba. Can the Minister indicate the position there? MR. USKIW: There are 4 more, Mr. Chairman; 1 posi tion is in Thompson and for that position we have received 20 applications and there are 5 persons to be interviewed; in Portage la Prairie, there are 3 vacant positions for which we received 36 applications, 11 persons are going to be interviewed for those 3 positions.

MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, this advertisement appeared on the 3rd of March. We are now more than two months past that date. How much longer are these people going to have to wait after having once applied? 2177 MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the fact that there were 429 positions just for the Winnipeg region meant that there was a tremendous amount of screening work that had to be done. The process was therefore slowed down considerably. There is no artificial rea son for that process to have slowed down, just the sheer volume of work that was undertaken. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, we're not concerned about those 429 because that portion of the program has been completed. You have now hired the 33 out of that 429 and I presume that is now completed. MR. USKIW: No, that process is not quite complete

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 for that group either, Mr. Chairman, but just about complete. Now, the same group is involved in screen ing all of the applications, Mr. Chairman, so that to the extent that there was a backlog in the Winnipeg region it had an effect on all of the other regions as well. MR. GRAHAM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That would indicate to me that the Minister has placed a priority on the urban area and left the rural to a later date and that causes some concern. I am a rural member and it seems as though the City seems to be getting first priority in this case. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I think that we ought to remember one important criteria and that was that we were not at all attempting to pinpoint a deadline by which this transformation would be completed. As a matter of fact, we have an arrangement with the exist ing contracting companies that they are prepared to carry on as long as is required and until we have fi lled every one of those positions, so that the transitional period is one of an amicable arrangement between the government and the outgoing contracting com panies. There is no urgency with respect to the filling of positions for that reason.

We are not unduly rush ing it for that reason as well. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, through you to the Minister, that we appreciate, but at the same time, was that information conveyed to those people that app lied for the job that it might be some time before they would be hired? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I do not know precisely as to what was indicated to the applicants. The sheer volume of applications though were such that there is no way in which one could have rushed that process. We are looking at 500 and some odd applicants for all of the regions, out of which we are employing 46 new people.

The screening process involved approxim ately 120 people who were interviewed, so that is a fairly lengthy process, Mr. Chairman. It is indicative if I may, Mr. Chairman, of the interest out in the public arena and the fact that, I suppose, job opportunities are rather scarce, I suppose that's what is indicated by the sheer fact the numbers of applicants. MR.

GRAHAM: I happen to agree with everything the Minister said in that respect, but at the same time the person that is applying for a job, he has been inter viewed and sits and waits for months on end before he hears anything about whether or not he has been accepted, does cause some concern with that indi vidual, particu larly if he is looking for a job and doesn't know whether or not he has been accepted. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the interview stage began about two weeks ago, so in essence there has not been that long delay between the interview and the acceptance or rejection of the applicant.

That process if fairly recent. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, we'll let that part of it go at the present time but I am sure the Minister must have received numerous letters - I know I have received letters from those that were providing the service to government prior to that - letters which expressed a concern to the effect that there had been no indication whatsoever, given to them that the ser vice they had been providing was unsatisfactory or anything of that nature.

I suppose it does cause a fair degree of upheaval in any business when an arbitrary decision is made without consulation that your servi ces are no longer required and what has been done, is done. But I would have hoped that if the Minister is going to proceed in this manner with the janitorial services, that those involved in providing service to govern ment be given ample warning before arbitrary deci sions are made in that nature.

Certainly those involved in the security field were caught flat-footed, totally unaware that there was any move in that direction whatsoever, and it certainly came as a shock to most of them. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, that is not quite correct. The contracts that we have with these firms do require that on termination or withdrawal, that there be a 30-day notice period given and that was done. We had considerab le discussions with them, during a course of a couple of months and they were, indeed, aware of the direction that we were taking in this respect.

We were not in violation with any of the terms of the agreement that we were then operating under and I believe it's because of that, it was the companies themselves. as I understand it, offered to continue on until this transition is complete. It appears to me at least, to be rather a harmonious transitional period, although I appreciate the fact that the companies in question would have preferred to have a new contract, rather than having a contract not renewed, but be that as it may, I believe that the transition period is being carried out in a very decent manner. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. LLOYD HYDE (Portage la Prairie): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just one question: could the Minister repeat the number of applicants he received for the Portage vacancies, please? MR. USKIW: 36 applications for 3 vacant positions. MR. HYDE: 36. Is the Minister offering any special opportunities to those who are residing in the particu lar area of Portage for these open positions? MR. USKIW: These people will ask their preference as to location, Mr. Chairman, so they were aware as to where their applications were directed to. 2178 MR. HYDE: Well, Mr.

Minister, what you're saying is that you're not really giving any opportunity to those who reside in the area, over someone say, from Win nipeg by ... MR. USKIW: Now all those that indicated a prefer ence for Portage la Prairie were then looked upon for those positions, Mr. Chairman.

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 MR. HYDE: That's all, thanks. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(f)

(1) Salaries. The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: Well, Mr. Chairman, just to get back to Security Services, I don't think that we passed that department yet, but I'm almost, almost astounded that none of the security officers that were being hired are bilingual. I think that with the amount of openings and to be bilingual could have been the criteria as to the opportunities of securing the job. It surprises me that the Government Services wouldn't have extended themselves a little bit to see that there was somebody of a bilingual nature that did apply.

You know, this comes out to show that a bilingual person is not quali fied to be a security officer. I don't think I want to push that particular aspect of it. But would the Minister advise whether the people who have applied for the job and have been chosen for the job, and there are none who are bilingual, is there any type of a program to see that these people will be trained to be bil ingual during their tenure as being a security officer in the employee of the Government of the Province of Manitoba. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a correc tion.

I'm advised by my staff that the information we gave was incorrect; 5 of the 33 are being considered within that group of 33 to be employed, but have not completed the security check that is standard pro ceedure for those positions. MR. KOVNATS: Yes, it's not that important to the Honourable Minister but I think the important thing is that, as one of the criteria was that an applicant be bilingual or have command of both official languages.

Would the Honourable Minister advise whether there will be a program to train the security forces that are being hired to be of a bilingual nature during their tenure, their time that they will be serving the people of the Province of Manitoba? MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, that is not a requirement under the present arrangement. The need for bilingualism is not as apparent in the area of enforcement and security of public buildings as it might be where one is dealing with the general public sort of over a counter or disseminating information to the general public. Security is nothing more than that.

It is merely security and it's a police operation in essence. MR. KOVNATS: To the Honourable Minister, you know, I'm not looking to cause the Honourab le Minis ter any problems but I think those people who support the bilingual nature of this country might not be very satisfied with that type of an answer inasmuch as public buildings are being requested to be signed in both official languages. I'm not sure whether I agree or not. I'm just saying that I know that there's a very strong force that's supporting that public buildings be signed in both official languages.

Here we are hiring security officers and it doesn't seem to matter whether they qualify in both official languages. I don't think that the Franco group of the Province of Manitoba are going to be quite satisfied with that type of answer. I would hope that the Honourab le Minister did have some sort of a program where these people could be tr�ned in the second language. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Chairman, again I want to remind the Member for Radisson that the 11 points that were, indeed, the criteria for employment, one of them was a bilingual consideration, so that all things being equal, the bilingual person had that opportunity to score a little higher on the point system. However, out of the 80-some-odd applicants that are being interviewed only 5 were able to perform in that area; so one cannot escape the fact that the bulk of the 85 people who applied for those positions did not qualify in that way. Now, one cannot answer for those that haven't applied for those positions.

I mean they are open to everyone and if others have an interest then the application process was there for them. We're merely pointing out that out of 85, 5 of them had those qualifications and it appears that all of them will likely be employed. We're certain of 4 out of the 5 at the moment. MR. KOVNATS: To the Honourable Minister, I now represent Niakwa rather than Radisson although I speak French every bit as well as the Member for Radisson, or almost as well. I'm fooling because he speaks French very very well. That's right. The good looking one's from Niakwa, so, you can't mistake us.

Was it ever considered when hiring these security forces, that other than French or English as a second language be considered in the opportunities of secur ing the position as a security officer with the Province of Manitoba, particu larly Ukrainian of which we have a large population in the province? MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, they're certainly not precluded but it's not part of the point system if you like or the criteria that was established. 217 9 MR. KOVNATS: Okay, the only thing I'm establishing at this point is that French and English were criteria and Ukrainian or any other language was not. MR.

USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I would presume that in the traditional sense of things, yes, that's cor rect. We are operating as usual. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River Heights. MR. WARREN STEEN (River Heights): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the Minister, I've been asked by a number of my colleagues if I would raise this question with you and I believe it would come under Security Services and that is public parking on the Legislative grounds for persons coming to see Members of the Legislature, constituents who are coming and hope fully going to be here for, say, an hour or even less.

A good example would be one of my colleagues this morning had six farm representatives come in to see him and these people had the foresight to leave their cars on the outskirts of the city and doubled up and two came in one car and four in another one. But, they had great difficulty finding parking and one of them said that they had to park down by the former Civic

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 Auditorium Building - that far away. Could the Minis ter look into this? And perhaps he could tell me what space is available for the public on limited terms. Would he give some thought to perhaps trying to encourage more employees to perhaps park in that lot across on the east side of Kennedy Street or perhaps maybe, Sir, we need to provide some more parking off the grounds for employees? Because I think today within this building we likely employ less people than we did 20 years ago since the building has been prac tically turned over to legislative purposes. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, the member is quite on target. That is one of the issues that we are currently dealing with and that is the assessment of the parking requirements for this immediate area and what adjustments we will be recommending in order to allow for more public parking space for the very rea sons that were already started by yourself. So, Mr. Chairman, we are addressing that problem and we will be coming up with some sort of a recommenda tion, hopefu lly, in a couple of months, but we are dealing with that. We're not in a position to give recommendations at this point. MR. STEEN: Mr.

Chairman, through you to the Minis ter, I would hope that we wouldn't have to go to a parkade because they are very expensive. I also would hope like most Manitobans that the lawns and the gardens that are provided within the Legislative grounds would be maintained. So, that makes the Minister's job very difficult to squeeze additional park ing spaces out of the confines that he has, but per haps off-grounds parking for employees and more of them being encouraged to use such facilities would be the procedure that the Minister and his department might follow. MR.

USKIW: Well, again I say, there's not much point in belabouring the issue, we are aware of those con cerns and we have been concerned for some time, Mr. Chairman. It's not a new issue, we've discussed this several years ago and had not come to dealing with it. But we intend to come up with some proposa ls on this issue very very soon. MR. STEEN: I thank you, Mr. Minister, and your staff for taking it under advisement and I do hope that you can come up with a solution in the near future. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(f)(1). The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, as a follow-up on that, the present policy on the legislative grounds for employee parking is not one of assigned parking at all. MR. USKIW: It's scrambled parking, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: That also applies for employees of the Woodsworth Building? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, it's a combination of things. The bulk of the parking is scramble parking but there are some assigned areas for certain catego- ries of employees. MR.

GRAHAM: When the Minister is taking it into consideration and studying the program, I wonder if he would consider that the employee parking on the legislative grounds be confined to those employees that are employed in this building? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, that's a very valid point and I tend to share that opinion. I'm not certain just what the impli cations of that opinion are, if it were impl emented, but I would tend to think that it is the sensible thing to do. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for River Heights. MR.

STEEN: I'd just like to mention to the Minister that perhaps if his colleague, the Memb er for Elm wood when he was Minister, got his wish and the purchase of the Great-West Life Build ing had pro ceeded, we would have acquired considerable acreage for parking and he wouldn't be wrestling with the problem to the degree he is today. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I can't comment on that at this stage. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 2. (f)

(1) Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, just before we leave Security, I would like to ask the Minister just one more question. In the field of Security all of the security provided in government buildings is provided by Manpower, is it? There are no animals used? MR. USKIW: I believe that's correct, yes, Mr. Chair man. I'm told that we have a very vicious executive director. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 2. (f)

(1) Salaries-pass; 2. (f)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 2. (

g) Gimli Indus trial Park: Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, I notice a drop in the salaries here. I presume there's been two or three less staff at Gimli. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, that reflects a staff tur nover which results in the new employees being hired at a lower rate than the outgoing employees but it's not a reduction of staff. 2180 MR. GRAHAM: We have the same staff then. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 2. (g)

(1) Salaries-pass; 2. (g)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 2. (

h) Alterations, Furniture, Furnishings and Incidental Expenses - Pro ject Management: 2. (h)

(1) Minor Projects. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in this particular appropriation, the Recoverable from Departments still leaves $150,000.00. I would presume that that

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 $150,000 applies to this building, is that correct? MR. USKIW: A substantial portion of it does with respect to furniture repair, Mr. Chairman, but not exclusively as such. I' m advised that there's a breakdown of furniture in any department, something that was not expected. It's sort of brought to this particular component in the department for attention and it's incorporated in those figures. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, I notice in this room a couple of the old Committee Room chairs and these ones here don't appear to be standing up too well.

Could the Minister indicate whether there are suffi cient of the old chairs still in stock or in storage to replace these if, in the next two or three years, should they continue to deteriorate? MR. USKIW: We're not certain as to how many are in stock but I would think that the direction would likely be to re-upholster in something other than the old standard, Mr. Chairman. The leather chairs are durable.

There's not doubt that they're a little bit tough on clothes and the fabric material is a little more comfortab le from the point of view of the aeration process and everything else that is desirab le with respect to the use of it. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, with the hopes of hav ing air-conditioning in the not too distant future, it may be that the old leather chairs and the great woodwork that went into those types of chairs, they may become something that we would want to have around again. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I don't know that I want to belabour this part of it.

We have tended to move towards the softer fabrics for better comfort and I suppose it reflects changing moods and perhaps affordability, I don't know. The other chairs are, I guess we used to say they were awfully sweaty to sit on. MR. GRAHAM: I found them very comfort able. MR. USKIW: Leather is leather. It's not quite as com fortab le as fabric. Perhaps I have my own bias, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(h)(1), Minor Projects-pass; 2.(h)(2), Less: Recoverable from Departments-pass; 2.(

j) Energy Management and Technical Services: 2.(j)(1), Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, several years ago we had a great experiment in this building with a solar heat collector and I would ask the Minister, has all of that material now been removed from the roof or is some of it still up there? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, all of that has been removed. MR. GRAHAM: That was all I wanted on that. 2181 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Niakwa. MR.

KOVNATS: Was the removing of that solar equipment from the roof the cause of the extensive damage and repairs that are going on right at this point to repair the roof? Was it caused by the removal of the solar equipment that was up on the roof? MR. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman, the roof is part of the general maintenance program and it is the entire roof that is being done. It isn't just the areas where the solar systems were insta lled. It is the entire roof sys tem that is being repaired. MR. KOVNATS: That is not the point of which you are to be questioned under Roof, this is different.

I just wanted to find out whether, in fact, it was caused by that solar system. MR. USKIW: No, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(j)

(1) Sal aries-pass; 2.(j)

(2) Other Expenditures. The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: One question on Other Expendi tures. Is stamps or postage considered under Other Expenditures, in any Other Expenditures, or does it just come under that post office where it says postage later on? MR. USKIW: No, every appropriation will have sta tionary, etc., Mr. Chairman. MR. KOVNATS: Would I be right in assuming that postage which comes under Other Expenditures in all of these departments would be double what it was previous to now or was it considered?

Did we know when these Estimates were going through that pos tage was going up from 15 cents to 30 cents? MR. USKIW: Yes, the new cost of postage stamps has been billed into the Estimates throughout, Mr. Chairman. MR. KOVNATS: One thing that comes to mind. I know that the Federal Government has, I guess it's free postage, or members have free postage, it was brought to my attention at a very early time when I first came into the Legisl ature where I took the opportu nity of using the postage system to my own use rather than for government use.

It was brought to my atten tion that wasn't the right thing and I haven't done so since that time. Is there any opportunity of govern ment members being given the opportunity of using the postage system for their own personal use rather than have to pay for it as is the general practise now? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, that would be a bit enriching I would think. The former Speaker tells me it would require a change in the Legislative Assemb ly Act. You're probably right, Mr. Chairman. MR.

KOVNATS: I was just looking for whatever bene fits befall a member of the Legisl ature where I see just earlier we are given parking facilities and I don't quite

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 agree. I certainly accept it, I think that parking is something that everybody should be allowed to pay their way, employees as well as elected members and I don't think that they should be given any special privi leges unless it's part of their contract of employ ment and if it is then I say give it to them. I don't really know whether in fact it is part of their contract of employment and I didn't want to go back to that other item. I just wanted to find out, to get back to whether postage was part of each department and the Hon ourable Minis ter has advised me that it is so I'm satisfied. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(j)

(2) Other Expenditu res-pass. Resolution No. 69. RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $35,623,500 for Government Services, Field Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1983-pass. The next item is No. 3 Supply and Services, 3.(

a) Executive Administration,

(1) Salaries. The Member for Vird en. MR. GRAHAM: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Perhaps the Mini ster could, someplace along the line here, spell out what the present policy is with respect to word processs ing, photocopying and what other ser vices are available to members of the Assembly. It mig ht be a good time to start now. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chair man, the Deputy reminds me that we are still awaiting a sort of recommendation from the Speaker on that very question now.

It is apparently a question that's under review and until we have some direction we really are not in a position to indicate any change from what was the practise but there's a review under way on that whole question. MR. GRAHAM: So at the present time then there is no change? MR. USKIW: Yes, the members have access to the word processing capacity providing it's a modest and reasonable request at the present time but the whole question of policy is somewhat up in the air at the moment; raised under consideration, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chai rman, one of the reasons I asked the question I noticed that in the last two months we have a photocopy machine now in our caucus room and I don't know whether we asked for it or not but it suddenly appeared there and we're not asking too many questi ons; we're using it. I did n't know whether it was through the generosity of the Minis ter or the generosity of the Speaker or how it got there. I did n't intend to ask too many questions. MR. USKIW: I remember there was a disc ussion on it, Mr.

Chairm an, and it was recommended that all the parties in the Assembly ought to be suppl ied with one for convenience of the operation of the political par ties in this building so I suppose that's a decision in itself that can be considered good or otherwise but we think it's better that way then having to share one or having to locate a facil ity elsewhere. MR. GRAHAM: Proceed. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 3.(a)

(1) Salari es-pass; 3.(a)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(

b) Central Veh icle Branch, Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Perhaps we should let the Salaries go. MR. CHAIRMAN: Salari es-pass; 3.(b)

(2) Other Expenditures. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chai rman, can the Minis ter indi cate, he did indicate earlier that in the automob ile fleet we are moving to smaller vehicles. Can the Minis ter give us an indic ation of whether we are getting the same performance, mi leage wise, total mi les before we have to replace them or what is the policy in that field? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, it's a bit too soon to come to a conclusion on that question since the program is merely two years old. It'll be another year or so before we can give a specific answer on that question.

I gave a figure earlier to the effect that 40 percent of our fleet is now in the compact car size. In fact. what I really said was. 40 percent of the total vehicle fleet which includes vans, trucks, station wagons and so on. if you separate out the large vehicles and you simply take a percentage of the cars, then we have 1,052 cars that are compacts and 174 that are the larger car. So it's over 80 percent that are compact cars. Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the Minis ter could give us a breakdown on how the compact cars are standing up.

Are the work orders for main tenance heavier for the smaller cars than the other? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the cars are relatively new. Anything that is two years or less, it's obviously not going to show up too much. It'll take another year I believe for that component to reveal itself. MR. GRAHAM: In the top-line cars - and I'm talking now about Minis terial cars - can the Minis ter indi cate how many Min isterial cars we have in the fleet at the present time? MR. USKIW: I wonder if the member would indic ate what he means by top line? 2182 MR.

GRAHAM: Well, I understand that the Minis ters usua lly have a little more, I guess, chrome and interior finish than the ordinary government cars. MR. USKIW: Perhaps maybe what the member should be interested in is, who is eligible and what are the specs for those cars.

On the eligible list for that upper-class vehicle if you like, is the government or the Executive Counc il and the Leader of the Oppos ition and the specs on them are as follows: four-door sedans are minim um 114- inch wheel base complete with all standard equip ment including the following: approximate price is about $13,000 and the items included are vinyl roof,

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 305 engines, V-8 or 225 six-cylinder jobs, five stan dard tread tires, steel belted radial, white walls, air conditioning, automatic temperature control, heavy duty battery, front and rear bumper guards, cruise-control, engine block heater; the light pack age, exterior remote-control mirrors, body-side pro tective moulding, radio AM/FM stereo four-speaker system, split front seat, custom wheel covering, tinted windshield, electrically-heated rear window. Now there probably is some possibility of Ministers trading off some of these components for other things that they would prefer.

When it comes to mine in particular, for example, is for rural travel my own preference would be to have a heavy-duty system, a suspension system. If that were decided then it would be traded off against something else, but the $13,000 criteria is what is important. MR. GRAHAM: I think there's maybe one other crite ria in there. In the purchase of Ministerial cars I believe there is a certain amount of discretion left with the Minister himself, is there? MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, within those guide lines, yes, but that's what I was alluding to when I said there's some trade-offs possible. MR.

GRAHAM: But the purchase of Ministerial cars is not done by a mass tender or anything; each one is more or less individ ually purchased? MR. USKIW: That is up to the Minister himself or herself as to where they would like their vehicle to be purchased from, and so on, yes. MR. GRAHAM: Are there any other members of the Legislative Assembly that are authorized to use gov ernment cars besides the Cabinet Ministers? Are Legislative Assistants? MR. USKIW: I'm not certain, Mr. Chairman, but I would hazard a guess that a Legislative Assistant could use a pool car. I'm not certain that I have the answer, Mr.

Chairman, but again I think the legislative assistants would logica lly be entitled. I don't think others would be. The suggestion is that maybe MLAs are entitled to and I doubt that very much because, if they were, then MLAs of all parties should be entitled to them. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Natural Resources. HON. AL MACKLING (St. James): Mr.

Chairman, I thought it made good sense when someone sug gested to me that if the Minister requested an MLA, one of his colleagues to perform some function for him, attend somewhere or do something when he would otherwise be engaged here in the building meeting or something, that would be in order to do something on behalf of the Minister. It seems to me that made good sense rather than have to get a pool car. The Minister's car is sitting out in front there. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, it's logical. I'm not sure whether or not the·legislation prevents it taking place. MR. MACKLING: I see. MR.

USKIW: It is logical because if the Minister is unable to attend a function, norma lly he would take his car or her car and in his place, of course, an MLA takes the same car, the exposure is the same. I don't see any risk factor or cost factor involved. It makes common sense, of course, but I don't know whether that possibi lity is inhibited by legislation. That's something we would have to check out I suppose. We'll have to take that under advisement, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: Just not to complicate the issue, but I guess I do agree with the Minister.

If somebody was representing the Minister at a function and took the Minister's car, I don't think that I would be the least critical of it at all, there's just no extra cost factor involved. But to progress a little bit further and to allow any member to take a pool car, I think I've got to say that I couldn't possibly agree with it inasmuch as, where do you stop?

I think if you allow a Legislative Assistant to take a pool car, then I think that maybe somebody who has some knowledge of a department should be allowed to take a pool car and maybe an Opposition member should be allowed to take a pool car and then maybe a secretary should be allowed to take a pool car, you know, just to be ridiculous. But I think that the Honourab le Minister's attitude is right and I think that pool cars should not be used by anybody other than those people qualified and I don't think that Legislative Assistants or just straight members because we're low on the totem pole anyway. MR.

GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I should not have asked the question. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(b)(2)-pass. 2183 MR. KOVNATS: I guess it kind of goes from one to the other because under Other Expenditures it's $9,630,000, less recoverable from departments, $9,859,000 which is more recovered from the depart ments than expended. Is it a profit-making venture to recover this money from the departments or am I reading the figures correctly, or are some of the Minis ters not smart enough to pay the right amounts? MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I think, there were two sets of people doing the Estimates, one on the out flow, one on the income. MR. KOVNATS: To the Honourable Minister, I can accept that that's probably the reason, there's quite a difference of over $200,000 ... MR. USKIW: They are Estimates though. MR. KOVNATS: But if there is a profit what do we do with the profit? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, we can only accept what is our due for services that are provided and if we've

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 overestimated the income we will not have received it. MR. KOVNATS: Well, I would accept that the Hon ourable Minister of Government Services is running a non-profit department and I'm not sure whether it's meant to be that way but that's the way it turns out. MR. USKIW: It appears that, yes, I agree, Mr. Chair man, but we can only recapture what is actually spent. MR. KOVNATS: But those two figures should balance. MR. USKIW: They should, logica lly. MR. KOVNATS: Okay. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, we have a large fleet of vehicles scattered all over the province and we have several government garages, is it the policy to have the repairs to those vehicles done only in those gar ages or is there some leeway for repairs to be done in the local communities? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the bulk of our repairs are done in private garages, although I suspect that the major repair work is probably directed into our own facilities where they're able to do them but, by and large, the bulk of the work is done outside the government system. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, I'm pleased to hear that that policy is in effect and the reason I asked it was several years ago - I'll recall the story to indicate that centralization sometimes doesn't work. MR. USKIW: It works but may be expensive. MR. GRAHAM: There was a public health nurse who had a problem with the battery in her car and they would not allow her to purchase a battery in that local community, they would have to send one out to her and that took a total of five days to send the battery out.

In the meantime, every morning the local garage had to go out, make a service call to start her car until such time as she received the battery and then they insta lled the battery and I think the service charge for starting her car were more than double what the cost of the battery was. MR. USKIW: Was anybody fired? MR. GRAHAM: I don't know. MR. USKIW: They should have been. Certainly, Mr. Chairman, if I have the floor, that is an example of something that is counter-productive. There is no rhyme nor logic in insisting that everything be done in-house. Common sense in the end ought to prevail.

On the other hand, if there is in-house capacity with relative convenience, then it's foolish to go outside and not use the in-house capacity, it works both ways. But I certainly would agree with the Member for Virden that for the sake of wanting to centralize, for ideological reasons or whatever, I could not accept a proposition like the example that he has just indicated. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, in this particular case I think central garage had several hundred brand new batteries sitting there and they didn't see any reason why one should be purchased in a small isolated community when they had several hundred sitting there. But it does indicate that sometimes discretion is the better part of valour and the common-sense approach usu ally turns out to be the best. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, the rule is that a person may use their credit card up to $100 without authori zation. Over $100 they must have authority to spend on car repairs. MR. CHAIRMAN: That's 3.(b)

(2) Other Expenditures. MR. GRAHAM: Before we pass that, Mr. Chairman, the licensing of government cars, is that still done in the local area or do we find that most of the cars are being licensed out of town? MR. USKIW: My understanding is that wherever the vehicle happens to be at the end of the calendar year is where it is renewed, so that if you're located in Virden that's where you would be renewing your license. Just to clarify further, Mr.

Chairman, Autopac has districts and that's what I'm referring to when I say in whichever district the vehicle is located at the end of the calendar year that's where they must renew. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, I believe this issue was raised several years ago and because different dis tricts have different rates for Autopac the licensing seemed to be carried out in the area with the lowest rate. That program has since been changed has it? MR. USKIW: That's right, because of that very fact, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(b)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(b)

(3) Acquisition - Vehicle Replacement. 2184 The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in the Acquisition of Vehicles what size tender is normally called, does it go in lots of 25 or 50 or, is there any set policy? MR. USKIW: What has been traditional is a one-shot approach, Mr. Chairman, once a year for the whole amount and what is being considered is splitting that into two times in one year but it's one effort. MR. GRAHAM: Up till now then there would only be one deal made for the entire year, with the exception of emergency cases. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I'm not sure why that is a problem because any dealer can bid on any number or even on an individual vehicle or any number of vehicles. So it doesn't preclude anyone from partici pating in the tender process. MR. GRAHAM: But it doesn't preclude one person either from bidding on every one of them? MR. USKIW: I suppose that's correct. Well, you know

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 there is a bit of a - it's not an anomaly, I guess it's a policy - of some of the car companies or at least one where the manufacturer submits the bid for a whole flock of vehicles if you like then distributes that suc cessful tender amongst the dealerships within that corporation. I believe Chrysler does that. They're the only ones. Yes, Chrysler Corporation submit a bid on behalf of all their dealers, so to speak, or at least their dealers. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in the past several years has there ever been a case where it all went to the one tender? MR.

USKIW: No, because of the variation in require ments, Mr. Chairman, it's not possible, I would hazard a guess. Just to give the member an example in this year's fleet, we are purchasing 227 compact sedans out of a total of 627 new vehicles and the others are various sizes and various vehicles from trucks to sta tionwagons to vans; all sorts of things that are being purchased under this appropriation, so one supplier would not be in a position to supply all of those. MR. GRAHAM: Well, those 600 and something, will they go out in one tender call? You're now talking of splitting it to two, is it? MR.

USKIW: Well, this year we've already called the tenders on these; on the whole lot. MR. GRAHAM: No, that's all. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(b)

(3) Acquisitions-pass; 3.(b)

(4) Less: Recoverable from Departments-pass; 3.(

c) Office Equipment Branch, 3.(c)

(1) Salaries-pass; 3.(c)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in the field of office equipment could the Minister indicate in rough fig ures how much equipment is owned and how much is leased? MR. USKIW: Yes, the information is that every piece of equipment except for copier machines are owned. The copying machines are leased. MR. GRAHAM: Does that include word processing? MR. USKIW: Yes, the word processing equipment could be owned, leased or a combination of owned and leased, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: That's all thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3. (c)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(c)

(3) Less: Recoverable from Departments-pass; 3.(

d) Purchasing Bureau, Salaries; 3.(d)(1)-pass; 3.(d)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(

e) Materials Branch; 3.(e)

(1) Salaries-pass. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in the field of mate rials. We find that - I think this is probably the

section to discuss it and it's tied in to some degree with pur- chasing as well - that in the field of materials and equipment that is required, quite often we find that the specs are drawn up very often are drawn in such a nature that it effectively prevents some people from bidding on the equipment because it might in fact specify one particular brand of equipment. I think there's probably a reason that should be given for doing that. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, for that very reason we are moving away entirely from brand names.

We recognize the point that the Member for Virden is raising and we're trying to get away entirely from brand name requirements. We're relying very much on performance specs rather than brand specs. MR. GRAHAM: That was my number one concern. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(e)

(1) Salaries-pass; 3.(e)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(e)

(3) Acquisition - Materials Inventory-pass; 3.(e)

(4) Less: Recovera ble from Departments. The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: Can the Honourable Minister advise how this department balances exactly? MR. USKIW: Well, in this

section they probably spoke to each other. I really can't tell you, Mr. Chairman. My Deputy confirms that's probably what happened. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(e)

(4) Less: Recoverable-pass; 3.(

f) Telephones; 3.(f)

(1) Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in the field of tele phones we could probably pass salaries and get down to Other Expenditures. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(f)

(1) Salaries-pass; 3.(f)(2)e The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, in the field of tele phones could the Minister indicate what improve ments are going to be made to the Norquay Exchange and the availability of outside lines to this particular building? I know from my own personal experience as an MLA trying to use the Watt system that you can use ten minutes trying to get an outside line. It's obviously because there is either an overload at certain periods of the day or else there's insufficient equipment in place. 2185 MR.

USKIW: Well, we're not certain whether the cent ric system is going to change very much with respect to that problem, Mr. Chairman. It is a problem at certain times of the day. I know I've encountered it many times. Quite often in disgust, I might add. I just simply go directly to the straight direct dialing system because there just isn't the time to dilly dally. It's too costly to wait for the WATTS line sometimes. MR.

GRAHAM: Would the Minister make inquiries and consider this to be an official complaint about the operation of the WATT system and see if there can be some improvement made or failing that we'll have to

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 go to the Department of Legislation and get the changes made for member services in that respect. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I share the member's concern there. I know I've been frustrated many times over it. So, yes, we'll undertake to see whether we can improve on that. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(f)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3. (f)

(3) Less: Recoverable from other Departments pass; 3.(

g) Post Office, 3.(g)

(1) Salaries-pass; 3.(g)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(g)

(3) Postage-pass; 3.(

h) Manitoba Gazette, 3.(h)

(1) Salaries-pass; 3.(h)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(

j) Queen's Printer Management and Brokerag e 3.(j)

(1) Salaries-pass; 3.(j)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(

k) Queen's Printer Operating, 3.(k)

(1) Salaries - pass; 3.(k)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 3.(k)

(3) Less: Recoverable from Departments. The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: Can the Honourable Minister advise under what department or where this item appeared in last year's Estimates? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I would like to draw attention to the fact that the Finance Department is recovering the $481,000 so it's shown as an expense here but it's recovered at the Department of Finance level or the Consolidated Revenues, in other words. Revenues from Board's Commissions and their agen cies, Queen's Printer is $481,000.00. MR. CHAIRMAN: Resolution No. 70.

RESOLVED THAT there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $12, 139,000 for Government Services for Supply and Services for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 1983-pass. The next department is Project Services, 4. (a)( 1) Salaries-pass; 4.(a)

(2) Other Expenditures-pass; 4.(

b) Design Services, Salaries. The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, we're dealing with architectural design and that field of activity. Could the Minister indicate how many architects we have on staff? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Phil Eyler (River East): Mr. Minister. MR. USKIW: We have four in the design area, Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: Could the Minister also indicate whether or not on any government buildings we hire outside architects or is it all ... MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, every building that is built for whatever sum, about 8 percent of that build ing is into private consulting fees for architectural services, Project Management and so on. MR. GRAHAM: All new buildings of government then are done by outside architects? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, we do about 25 percent of the work and 75 percent is contracted out. In the renovations end, we do contract out the major jobs as well, where there's a major renovation. MR. GRAHAM: The small jobs are done by in-house staff? MR. USKIW: That is correct. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 4.(b)(1 ). The Member for The Pas. MR. HARRY M.

HARAPIAK (The Pas): I'd like to bring up a subject which I've had quite a few questions on in my locality and that's during the election of '77 there was a jail tendered in The Pas area and after the election the tender was cancelled. Apparently the contractor was paid off and a while later, probably a year later, it was again tendered. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, just on a point of order. I wonder if we couldn't leave that to Item 6 which is Acquisition/Construction of Physical Assets. I think that's where that should be debated because we're not at that level, at that stage in the Estimates yet. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 4.(b)(1)-pass; 4.(b)(2) pass; 4.(c)(1 )-pass; 4.(c)(2)-pass; 4.(d)(1 ). The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, dealing with the Land Acquisition Branch, and in this particular field, maybe the Minister is wearing two hats at the particular time because his other department makes extensive use of this particular branch of the government.

We have seen a fair degree of activity or, perhaps I should say, resentment towards the activity of the Land Acquisition Branch over the past several years and it appears as though government now doesn't hesitate but goes through expropriation rather than a lengthy bargaining process. Could the Minister give us an explanation of why there seems to be this increasing use of the expropriation proceedings? MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I really am not terribly familiar with the whole process although my own opinion is that the fairest approach is expropriation.

If you are buying a number of properties in a given project, what we have had many times, and I recall discussing it before, is a long drawn-out period of land acquisition for a major project and it could take perhaps two or three or five years to purchase all of the property required and you end up with a situation where the first person that made the deal, so to speak, on his or her property received a much lower com pensation for their property than did the last holdout on that project and therefore resulted in some bad feelings at the end of the project.

People do compare notes and especially if it's in a small community and therefore it seems obvious to me that the fairest way is to file an order at which time your valuation day becomes affective for all the properties that are to be acquired for the project. I think that is the fairest system, although I'm just going to check with my Deputy as to whether that process is indeed what we 2186

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 are doing. I am advised that old problem I alluded to is still with us, Mr. Chairman, so I guess we're going to have to take a good solid look at that one. I'm not at all ena moured with the idea that in the same project, where people receive a fair variation in compensation for the same kind of land or buildings or whatever it is, I would prefer that they be treated all alike. It ought to appear to be just, is what I'm really saying and the odd hold-out tends to make it unjust, Mr. Chairman.

My preference is the notice of expropriation is probably the fairest method, even though it appears and sounds like a harsh approach, I believe, in the end it is indeed the fairest approach. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt this problem of land acquisition will not be solved for probably many years to come. When government, in its collective wisdom, attempts to take from people, the very people that they are elected to protect, it begins in a conflict of interest position which as time goes on doesn't diminish at all.

There has been an awful lot of hard feelings built up over the years, in some cases quite justified, when farmers have been either expropriated or their land has been purchased, only to find that it is probably 5-10 years down the road before government actually needs it. This is only one problem that occurs.

Another problem that I brought to the Minister of Highways' attention quite sometime ago where the holder of property is more than willing to accede to government wishes if they request fill material to build a highway, he's more than willing to give it to him provided they will put the black dirt back and allow him to farm it once more. But through the various bureaucracies and planning and engineering, I sup pose, they like to see everything stereotyped and, I don't know what it is, but there always seems to be a dozen different reasons why they can't go that route.

It causes concern to myself and to people and does not leave government in a good light in the public eye. That has nothing to do with the Land Acquisition Branch by itself but the activities of the Land Acquisi tion Branch, I believe, through my own experience of talking to people over the years, I think the members of the Land Acquisition Branch, while they do have a great deal of diplomacy, I think they could probably use a little bit more at certain times. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I know the sensitivety the member is dealing with.

I personally was very much annoyed some years ago when the government decided, in its wisdom at that time, that with a stroke of a pen they were going to effect expropriation with out actually paying for land and somehow society has accepted that. I'm somewhat still overwhelmed by that and that happens to be the case with the pro grams in the Highways department where once a highway is established there is a restricton on private property useage along both sides of a highway and at major intersections without compensation to the owners. I find that rather awkward, quite frankly, I didn't ever agree with that.

I've run into it many times and have tried to repres ent individuals with respect to their case problems but to think in terms of someone having purchased prop- erty that might be worth $100,000 or $200,000 and then to be told that you can't do anything with it because the Highways department won't let you because some day they may want to build something there, and that someday maybe the next generation in the minds of the engineers in the department, that's how far ahead they're looking. But they are, in effect, expropriating people's rights today when they make that decision.

The whole province has really been expropriated in that way along all the highway routes and I'm amazed that there hasn't been public outcry. I suppose it's because the public has sort of gone along in a responsible way recognizing that highways are, indeed, a service to the public. I know some people that have been financially hurt and very substantially so because of that building restriction that is placed on their property for which they receive no value whatever.

So, I know what the member is alluding to; I know that it's the ease of administration that often dictates how these things are done and with respect to properties being allowed to be cultivated, even after they are conveyed to the public or whatever, I suppose that is awkward admi nistratively and that's all I can presume that that is the case. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, I didn't want to get involved in a discussion of the Highways branch at this particular time but in the Land Acquisition Branch and it can be for highways, it can be for buildings, it can be for any different department of government, I do find though that there seems to be a fairly wide difference of opinion as to the price of land as is proposed by the Land Acquisition Branch and that price that is finally granted by the Land Value Apprai sal Commission when you go through expropriation proceedings. As long as that difference is significant I think that discontent in the community is justified.

It would be my hope that some day the prices paid by the Land Acquisition Branch would be the same prices as are finally approved after you go through expropriation and the Land Value Appraisal Commis sion, comes down with the same figure. When that occurs then I would have to say that the Land Acquisi tion Branch is doing an excellent job because their actions have been justified by another board that has been set up to review their activities. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, we've had occasions like that and I know people that have contacted me per sonally and said "that board is a farce, they just rubber stamp what the negotiator was fixing a price on. So you can't win on that one. Mr. Chairman. MR. GRAHAM: I can't buy that one. MR.

USKIW: Well, but that's happened where the Board has upheld the recommendation of the staff of the branch and people have felt that the Board was just window dressing, that they weren't really inter ested in the rights of the individual as to value; it was a process that had to be undertaken to satisfy the public but I don't think you can win on that one, Mr. Chair man. I know what the member is trying to suggest, he's trying to say that the appraisers are a little stingy on their offers and that may be, I believe the apprais- 2187

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 ers have the idea that they ought to squeeze out the best deal for the public when they are negotiating and I'm not sure that is in itself, wrong. I suppose everyone must bargain for one's own interest in that sense and the owners are in that same position. Therefore, the ruling of the board hopefully is a ruling that is accep table to both sides. MR. GRAHAM: Well, Mr. Chairman, some of the activities of the branch do cause me some concern and I think it was just this past week that we saw a letter or an

article in the paper, I believe, where a citizen living in Ontario has been going through a process of expropriation and finally government has decided that, if he doesn't show up, they're going to take his money. Apparently, according to the news paper article, the man never disappeared at all. Somebody must have lost the records in the depart ment because they had contacted them at the same address several years prior to that.

Stories like that only serve to embarrass and I don't believe they serve any useful purpose, but it does point out that land acquisition is a concern, a major concern, and if it is not absolutely necessary I would urge government to move very slowly in land acquisi tion until it's absolutely necessary to acquire the property. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, we really are not in control of that decision in this department other than for those projects that we ourselves administer. But by and large, we are merely the delivery vehicle for all of the departments who acquire land or who need the acquisitions.

We are merely instructed when and where to make these acquisitions by the other departments. So we have no authority on that ques tion other than when we put up our own buildings. Then we have that authority. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: The Minister may not have that decision-making power, but he certainly has the abil ity to convey those concerns to the other departments that are involved. I would hope that the government either makes immediate use of property once they obtain it, or go slow in the acquisition. MR.

USKIW: You know, I'm inclined to agree with that although I have a reservation. I know that in the Highways Department that would never work because we make decisions on certain rights-of-way. A year may go by or two years may go by and then the priorities have changed and the government has put on the shelf the particular piece of road that they intended to build. Meanwhile, the acquisition has already been completed and sometimes governments change and that road is not built for several years. In the meantime, the government continues to own the right-of-way.

I don't know whether there's a solution to that with respect to that one department. There may be with respect to other departments. Highways also requires a tremendous amount of lead time from the point of decision to construct a road to the point of construction. So a lot of this is sort of promoted far in advance. It's sort of a tentative agenda or program that is looked at four or five years in advance.

In the course of those years the economics change, the expectations may be different, the priorities switch and we're not always certain that what was agreed upon five years ago was, in fact, going to happen today. So I'm not sure that there's a clear-cut answer to that. MR. GRAHAM: Well, Mr. Chairman, maybe I am get ting departments mixed now, but I do know of land that has been acquired.

It has been acquired for - I wouldn't say several years, but for two or three years and I was quite dismayed this year when the Minister filed his highway projects for the year and listed that same road as acquisition of land and no further work being done on it. I'll say no more. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I should respond to that. That shows up as acquisition of right-of-way. As I recall it, only when there is still some outstanding parcel yet to be acquired, it may be 99 percent bought up but if it's not 100 percent, it'll still show up as an ongoing program in the carry-over end of the pro gram.

Now, the member may be right in his example. It could be that it has all been acquired. Why it is shown as a project still to be completed, I wouldn't know. I'm not that familiar with that particular project. MR. GRAHAM: Well, Mr. Chairman, I was referring to PR355 where the land has been entirely purchased and the Minister, not wanting to disappoint people, showed it as acquisition for one more year, but no construction was started this year which did cause considerable dismay to quite a few people. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I do want to respond to that because I wouldn't want to have attributed to me a decision that was not, in fact, made. The carry-over work is a matter that is reported to the Minister by the department and it comes in the form of a dozen sheets of paper that indicate what has not been yet com pleted. It is not something that the Minister sees in advance or tinkers with - at least I haven't, in this example. It was merely dumped on my desk as infor mation and su bsequently printed for distribution to the members as the program for the year.

I wouldn't know one over the other in terms of the carry-over project, Mr. Chairman, nor would I take the time to become that knowledgeable because I don't think it's that important. 2188 But with respect to that one example, when it was brought to my attention that there was some desire to have the project moved, I simply looked it up and there it was shown as acquisition of right-of-way and that was my response to the group that wanted to know. They were the ones that said to me, but that's already been done. They may be right; there may not be much more to be done.

But, in any event, I want to assure the Member for Virden that my role on that particular one was no role at all, other than to receive the information. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member forThe Pas. MR. HARAPIAK: As I started saying earlier, we were using trailers for jails in The Pas and in 1977 the

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 government of the day decided to build a jail - (I nterjection)- we're not there yet? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: To the Honourable Minister. I received a call from one of my constituents yesterday concerning a problem that she's anticipating at this time and it's concerning a piece of property that was acquired by the Province of Manitoba. The property was on the Perimeter Highway between St. Mary's Road and the Red River on the south side of the Perimeter Highway.

Can the Honourable Minister advise what that property was acquired for and, as there is equipment and that was a couple or three years back that, I think, the property was acquired - but there is equipment moving onto the property now and there is a fear of the residents in that area that the property is going to be made into - I know this isn't part of the Honourable Minister's but I think that it was acquired by the Hon ourable Minister's department - for what purpose was it acquired and for what purpose is it going to be used for at this time? MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I can provide that infor mation tomorrow, I'm going to have to check with the Land Acquisition Branch to find out what the purpose was and which department was involved and so on. I have no knowledge of it. MR.

KOVNATS: To the Honourable Minister, I didn't think that I would be able to get an answer but I was asked to see if I could find out and if the property is being used for something other than what it was acquired for then I will have to take some additional action to the department that will be developing that property, so it's quite important but I think another day certainly won't be a big factor. MR. USKIW: Just to be helpful, I wonder if the member would give me an idea as to what side of the Perimeter Highway he is . MR. KOVNATS: South side. MR. USKIW: South side okay, that's fine. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 4.(d) (1) -pass; 4.(d)(2) pass: 4.(d) (3)-pass. Resolution No. 71 - RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,038,800 for Government Services, Project Services, for the fiscal year ending the 31st, day of March 1983-pass.

Section 5. Land Value Appraisal Commission. 5.(a) -pass; 5(b). The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, I believe before supper the Minister indicated at that time that the Land Value Appraisal Commission was being moved out of the Wo odsworth Building and the destination was unknown or uncertain at this time. At that time the Minister indicated it might be coming into this building. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, no, I said hopefully it will be within the vicinity of this building. We haven't pinned down a location for them as at this point. MR. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, the Land Value Appraisal Commission is a fairly independent body that should operate at arm's length from government and I wouldn't want to see it too close to this building, purely for aesthetic qualities. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, I don't believe that there is any relevance to that in the sense that with modern communication you're as close as the telephone but, in any event, I have no real concerns quite frankly where that body will be located within the city.

I sup pose it makes a difference for the bureaucracy when they interface with the various departments that they are working for but in terms of the Ministerial office it makes no difference whatever. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRM AN: 5.(b) -pass; 5.(c)- pass. Resolution No. 72 - RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $86,000 for Go vernment Services, Land Value Appraisal Commission, for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March 1983-pass. No. 6. Acquisition/Construction of Physical Assets. The Honourable Member for The Pas. MR.

HARAPIAK: As I started saying earlier in The Pas area we are using trailers for jails and the government of the day decided that it warranted building a jail; they tendered it, in 1977 the tender was awarded and in the meantime an election was called. The new gov ernment decided to cancel the tender and pay off the contractor. A while later they tendered again on a scaled-down model and I'm led to believe, and the story in the community is, that the scaled-down model come in at a higher price than what the original jail was tendered at.

To save money the government decided to run the project without a project manager, the contractor was allowed to build the jail without any supervision. There was a lot of problems on that building project and I believe there is still problems with the product which isn't finished because there are deficiencies in the building. I'm just wondering have we learnt a lesson from working a project of that size without a project manager and at what stage is it at now. Have they transferred completely? 2189 MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, the project that the member refers to was originally offered for tender in September of 1977, it involved 63,740 square feet at a tender price of $6,093,173.00. I don't have to remind the member that there was a change of government in 1977 which resulted in a freezing of the project at that time. Immediately upon assuming office the govern ment froze the project, subsequently the project was cancelled; frozen in the fall of 1977, according to the information that I have here, and then cancelled in 1978.

The original project was supposed to be com plete in 1979, it was cancelled in 1978 and then a new tender was called in August of 1979 which explains the delay. The courthouse portion was occupied a year ago, it's the correctional facility that has been delayed and which is just about ready to open. In any event the current facility that we're talking about is

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 58,780 square feet, which is some 5,000 square feet smaller than the original and the contract price was $5,566,881. Additional to that, there is a penalty of $237,084 paid to the original architect whose project was aborted; then there was a claim by foundation com pany of $115,000 that was settled out of court for the abortion of the project; then there was an additional $6,000 to the architect, an out-of-court settlement again.

So we had about $350,000 of penalty for abort ing the project which resulted in a total cost of $5,924,965, which amounts to a $100.8 a square foot, as opposed to $95.6 a square foot on the original project. What we have here is a smaller building that's costing us just as much money as the original one but the court facilities were occupied last March and the correctional facilities are just about to be occupied. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for The Pas. MR. HARAPIAK: Are there some cells being occu pied at this time? MR. USKIW: They were to move into the facility in the month of April, Mr.

Chairman, but we're not certain that has happened. MR. HARAPIAK: Earlier you had said that we had used some of our own design people and we con tracted 75 percent. Was this jail designed by a private consultant? MR. USKIW: Yes, Mr. Chairman, a project of this size would be done by a private consulting firm and would be managed by a private consulting firm. What took place here was that the firm that was commissioned in 1977 in September had to abort the project because of the cancellation of the project by the government. A new firm was appointed.

So, what we ended up doing is paying consulting fees to two firms on the same building because even though the project was aborted the government had to pay the original consultant $237,000 plus $6,000 and damages of $115,000 to foundation company. MR. HARAPIAK: Some of the equipment that is required, Mr. Minister, there had to be a wall removed in order to put it into the building and the equipment is going to wear out and the walls are going to have to be removed again to replace it. It just didn't seem to make much sense in you utilizing equipment of this sort.

It just seemed that the equipment wasn't designed for the building - those washers and dryers. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chairman, no, I'm advised that there was a knockout panel in the wall for that very reason so it appears not to be the way the member is suggesting. MR. HARAPIAK: I was in The Pas and there wasn't a knockout wall built for that purpose. The wall had to be removed in order to get the equipment in there. I'd still like to be informed when the official opening is on. I'd like to attend when it is being opened. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Chairman, I really can only indicate what the staff members are advising but we'll check that aspect of it for the benefit of the member. The opening will be arranged with the Minister of Correc tions, Mr. Chairman. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Virden. MR. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, dealing with that same building - we had a two-year time delay and if you take the normal rate of inflation which at that time was about between 11 and 13 percent on that two-year period, it would appear that there was more than a $1 million saving on that building by delay. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr.

Chairman, there's no doubt that inflation factors would argue that there may be some factor there that ought to be considered. Not withstanding that, that building would have been built for $350,000 less than it was built for, had not the government paid the consulting fees to the original architect whose services were not used. It still was overpriced by $350,000 in round figures. Had that not happened we would have had a larger building had they continued with the original one. MR. GRAHAM: Well, Mr.

Chairman, we can get into a very good argument with figures here but, again, I say to the Minister for the amount of money spent and taking the inflation factor into consideration that there was an in excess of $1 million saving to reduce it by 5,000 square feet. MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, I suppose one can look at it in retrospect every time one builds a build ing. Inflation factors are interesting things to play with. The fact of the matter is that the building that was built could have been built for $350,000 less than it was built for, for the reasons that were stated.

We did get a smaller building for a higher price is what I'm saying. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: I don't think I want to start playing any political games at this time, to the Honourable Minister, because we're trying to make some points with the place at The Pas rather than the little toilet facility across the street. But, I just throw it in because I'm not going to play the game.

Well, you know, we could find out what the utilization factor is of the toilet facility that was built under the New Democratic Party; how much toilet paper is being used, but that would be just as ridiculous as trying to put the blame of what happened up at The Pas -( Interjection)- MR. USKIW: It's the colour of the paper that's important. 2190 MR. KOVNATS: That's right. Now, I was just wonder ing if the Minister could ju st give me what happens when a jail is starting to be occupied. Is it a grand opening or is it a grand closing? MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Ch airman, I'm rathe r intrigued by that comment.

I suppose one could classify it as either.

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 MR. KOVNATS: I have one other question. It was under Land Acquisition which I mi ssed, to the Hon ourable Minis ter, if I could ask it under Minis ter's Salary and it shant take too long. I'm sorry I miss ed it; I was kind of daydreaming at the time. MR. DEP UTY CHAIRMAN: No. 6-pass. The Member for Flin Flon. MR. JERRY T. STOR IE (Flin flon): Thank you, Mr. Chai rperson. I'd like to take this opportunity to put a couple of comments on the record and also take an opportunity to ask the Minis ter a couple of questions.

Fir st, as the Minis ter is aware, the Cit y of Flin Flon has presented a brief to the province and ou tlined some of its concerns and needs for the upcoming years, the next couple of years. One of those con cerns is the need for a provincial building in the City of Fli n Flon. If I could just, for a minute covert he histor y, back in 1976 the City of Flin Flon had been promised a provincial building and it was my understanding that the plans were well in advance.

The ground had actu ally been acqui red by the city, or not acqui red, per haps donated to the province for the purposes of a provincial building and as a result of the election in '77 those plans were forthwith scrapped. In reference to the Member for Niakwa, it was an ignominious closing. The grounds where the provincial building was to have been built, they had erected a sign indicating that the provincial building was to be located on that particular site and the day after the election the sign was down.

So at that point the Department of Gov ernment Services, or I believer it was then Public Works, had determined that there was a need in the area for a provincial building to the people in Flin Flon, and to my way of thinki ng, there is still that need in the City of Flin Flon and I know for certain that the City Coun cil feels that way. If I mig ht provide some rationale for the need for a provincial building in the cit y.

Fir st of all, if we just take a cursory look at towns of similar size in the area or in Southern Manitoba, for instance the Town of Portage or the Town of Dauphin, the Town of Swan River, the Town of The Pas or the Town of Thompson, each of those commun ities has a provincial build ing. Each of those comm unities is represented in that pro vincial building by 10, 12, 15 different government departments.

The City of Fli n Flon which represents a popu lation area of approximately 15,000 people is represented by five government departments and it is my feeling and I know it is the commun ity's feeling, that there is need for representation by other government departments, in particular, the Economic Develop ment, the Department of Northern Affai rs, the Attorney-General's Departments.

We have a rotating court system that occurs there and I know the Attorney-General is well aware of the fact that the present courtroom facil ities are woefully inadequate and I know as well the Attorney-General's Depart ment is presently looking at finding additional space, and upgrading additional space. As well, there is need for personnel from the Munic ipal Affa irs Department; perhaps Assessment of Planning. The Department of Education should have some personnel located in the comm unity ; perhaps 2191 Adult Education or Continuing Education specialists.

Consumer and Corpor ate Affairs could as well be located there. The reason I say that is because, for a city the size of Flin Flon, there is obviously a need for the people to have access to those departments and it is extremely inconvenient, given the present system and the pres ent number of departments that exist there. Again, because of the lack of a provincial build ing, when people are seeking Government Services they have to trek up flights of stairs and down long dark halls and so forth to get to these services. It is incon venient to many people.

It is not only inconvenient, it's a deterrent I suppose, for many senior cit izens and those with handicaps and disabi lities because many of the government offices are located up flights of stairs and so forth, therefore, people who would nor mally take advantage of Government Services are not taking advantage of them, they don't have access to them. If we look at the provincial buildin gs in some of the other commun ities that I've mentioned, the whole commun ity takes advantage of it and I think that's a desirable thing.

As well, Flin Flon finds itself in a "Catch 22" situa tion where government departments, when they're looking to establish personnel in the area, look at Flin Flon and say: "Well, we have no place to put these people. We have to find additional space, rent addi tional space." It's difficult to find additional space that's adequate so it becomes, I suppose, a decision along the way made by the department, not to locate in Flin Flon, personnel in Flin Flon but rather to locate them in The Pas or in Thompson. In that sense we can't win.

We continue to lose services because we don't have the facil ities and we don't have the faci lities because personnel are placed in other commun ities. I think we can make a strong case for the need given the size of the city and given the fact that in 1977, or as late as 1977, the department had determined that there was a need for a provincial buildin g. I know that the city is looking towards a government to rectify this situation. I know the city has presented their brief to personnel in your department. I won dered if you could just comment briefly on what the situation is at the present moment. MR.

GRAHAM: I'm sure he would like a constituency office, too. MR. CHAIRMAN, Harry M. Harapiak (The Pas): Mr. Minister. MR. USKIW: Mr. Chai rman, the member is giving us a bit of his tory. The basis of the decision for a building in Flin Flon, as I recall it, had to do with the then policy of the government of the decentralization of govern ment which was captioned as the stay option princi ple for rural Manitoba and where we tried to distrib ute government to all regions of the province for eco nomic reasons as well as reasons of convenience to the commun ities in question.

So I don't fault the pre vious administration for having changed those priori ties because after all they were elected to govern and they governed according to their best advice or opin ion, if you lik e, or policy. That's natural in the process.

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 The City of Flin Flon officials have been here and have met with a number of government departments. Unfortunately, I was not able to meet with them but my staff did indeed meet with them. There is ongoing communication now and really a decision will have to be made whether or not we want to resurrect that old policy, if you like, or continue with it, and that is the further distribution of government personnel through out the various regions of the province, and not only regions centrally located within a region, but dispersed throughout the region to some extent.

I still believe that's a good policy. I have not changed my opinion on that because I think that gov ernment has to be, shall we say, evenly apportioned out in its economic thrust throughout the province to be fair and equitable to all the regions that do aspire for some measure of equality of opportunity, whether it's in the employment area or whether it's the mere spin-off benefits of payroll and so on for the business community and so on.

I still have that bent and if there appears to be a need and an opportunity, shall we say, without trying to do the impossible then I don't see any reason why we can't resurrect something there. It would have to be looked upon, certainly. I know that staff are working on it, Mr. Chairman. MR. STORIE: I certainly appreciate the Minister's comments and I appreciate the fact that he is still somewhat committed to the idea of decentralization and, as well, to the concept of equality of access because I think that basically is the issue.

As I've said, there are other communities who have that access, Flin Flon being one of the major centres in Manitoba without that access. The distribution of the departments, the limited number of departments prevents people from having access to services that are generally granted to other Manitobans. It's a double difficulty for people living in that remote a setting because a phone call to a gov ernment department is an expense for them although there are toll numbers.

It seems that it doesn't matter how much information you try to get the public with regard to the access they have by phone, it doesn't come through. The service is not utilized to the same extent as when there are facilities available in their own communities. I would certainly hope that we can proceed and review the situation and meet some of the needs that are in that community. MR. CHAIRMAN: No. 6-pass.

Resolution No. 73 - RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $25,495,200 for Government Services for Acquisition/ Construction of Physical Assets for the fiscal year ending the 31st Day of March, 1983-pass Mr. Minister. MR. USKIW: Yes, I did neglect or overlook to pass on to the Member for Virden the blueprints or architectu ral sketch for the Law Courts Building. Perhaps he might want to take a look at it at this point and still make some comment if he wishes. MR. CHAIRMAN: Which brings us back to the first Resolution, 1.(

a) Minister's Salary. The Member for Niakwa. MR. KOVNATS: I'm sorry, I apologized to the Minis ter earlier concerning it was under Land Acquisition Branch and it's not going to be of a technical nature so it's not going to involve any of his staff. The Honour able Minister has been most co-operative in assisting me particularly in acquiring some property that is on rail-abandoned property and I appreciate that, but I've run into a bit of a snag.

I think that it might be not just my own problem but problems of other people inasmuch as a piece of the property that I wanted was part of the station property in the Town of Menisino. Now, this station property is not bordered on either side by anybody so it's sort of open property. I had wished to build on that property and develop it very very quickly for a particular reason. I now find that all station property is to be turned over to the Local Government Districts. Now, I thought that the Local Government District would have first choice on the properties, and rightly so, if they had a project in mind.

But I understand that what the Local Government District have in mind at this time is to put the property up for tender or resale and acquire some additional monies and I'm not even that much against that part of their attitude. I think that they should be giving some consideration to other than just an open tender, because this is in a particular small town and I think the people in the town should have some choice as to who their neighbours are going to be in the town at this time.

I would hope that maybe the Honourable Minister would sort of get involved a little bit and see if the property is not for development by the Local Gov ernment District that I, as a local resident in the area, might be able to acquire that property or others like me can acquire property similar. 2192 MR. USKIW: Well, Mr. Chairman, this is not in this department but I will undertake to have someone get in touch with the member. That is someone from my other department so that this can be resolved in an amicable way. I'm not at all familiar with it. Really, we shouldn't be debating it here.

We'll deal with it on a personal basis, Mr. Chairman, through the proper department. MR. KOVNATS: That suits me fine. I just thought under Minister's Salary. It's such a wide-open discus sion. I understand and I'll be happy to speak to the Honourable Minister on a personal basis concerning that other piece of property on the highway by St. Mary's out in South St. Vital, so I can get it all settled at one time. MR. USKIW: That's fine. MR.

KOVNATS: I'd just like to go on record as saying thank you to the Minister for his complete co-operation and I' m sure that other people are getting the same type of co-operation as I did. MR. CHAIRMAN: Did the Member for Virden want to make some concluding remarks? MR. GRAHAM: Just before we conclude, I think we've been very easy on the Minister this time. We'll

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 just maybe get a final piece of information. Some 10 days ago there was an

article appeared in the paper and I know we're not supposed to ask anything that's sub judica under this - I don't believe it's sub judica until charges have been laid - I wanted to ask the Minister if the RCMP investigation has been concluded. MR. USKIW: My understanding is that the investiga tion has been concluded and a report has been filed with the Attorney-General's Department. We're not in a position to comment on it at this point in time. MR. GRAHAM: Well, if the Minister's not prepared to comment at this time, I'll accept that. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(

a) Minister's Salary-pass. Resolution No. 68. RESOLVED THAT there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2, 181,800 for Government Services for General Administration for the fiscal year ending the 31st Day of March, 1983-pass. MR. USKIW: Thank you, gentlemen SUPPLY -FINANCE MR. CHAIRMAN, Jerrie T. Storie (Flin Flon): Com mittee will come to order, continuing with the Finance Estimates, Item No. 2. Treasury Division, 2.(

a) Salaries. The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. VICTOR SCHRO EDER (Rossmere): Mr. Chairman, I have some answers here with respect to actual borrowing during 1981-82. The actual borrow ing amounted to $735 million of which $138 million was from non-market sources and the balance from the public market. Funds were borrowed for the fol lowing purposes: General Government Programs $289 million, as opposed to budgeted projections of $100 million; Provincial Sinking Fund $40 million and that was in accordance with budgeted projections; Manitoba Hydro $138 million, as opposed to bud geted $75 million.

I'm told that the reason for the discrepancy there was there was a considerable dif ference between the projected revenue that Hydro was to receive and the amount that it actually did receive, there wasn't a profit generated internally.

Manitoba Telephone System, the actual borrowing was $49 million, as opposed to a budgeted of $35 million; advances to Crown corporations $56 million, as opposed to budgeted $40 million; Unfunded advances previously made to Crown corporations and outstanding at March 31, 1981 $40 million, as opposed to nil amount budgeted for that item; Refunding net of Sinking Funds $88 million, as opposed to budgeted $75 million; the actual totaled $700 million, as opposed to budget $365 million, giv ing us a total increase in working Capital of $35 mil lion.

Again it should be noted that Manitoba Hydro had a bad year and was unable to generate the antici pated internal funds for their Capital program. Also the increase in working Capital only offsets a working Capital deficiency at March 31st, 1981 of $71 millio n. I am also told that the expectation to borrow $250 million from public markets as cited in last year's budget was predicated to some extent on util izing short-term markets or lines of credit, rather than being forced to borrow in then unattractive long-term markets.

I am also advised that none of the borrowing which was done was as a result of new initiatives undertaken by the new government after November 30th, 1981. I do have some other answers, but the answers are to other questions and if the honourable member wishes to respond to this first, I can ... With respect to the increases in staff years.

First of all, there's a decrease of half a staff year in the Minis ter's office because half of my salary is being paid by Labour and Manpower; there's another 2.26 decrease in the Special Studies area and that has to do with the expected completion of the Manitoba Assessment Review Committee, that should be completed; there is a decrease of .16 staff years in the area of the Succes sion Duty office and that's because of the belief that there will be less work; there's an increase of one staff year for Executive Director Information Management which we had discussed earlier; there's an increase of one staff year for a secretary to the Insurance and Risk Manager; an increase of one staff year reflecting the transfer of a position having to do with an internal transfer which I think I'll need a further explanation on why the transfer would increase a staff year.

An adjustment of one staff year for an additional financial analyst position approved by Treasury Board 23 of 81-7(

a) and in the Federal/Provincial Relations there's one permanent staff year for new economic research analyst position and two term staff years for the development of a provincial econometric forecasting model in Federal/Provincial relations; two term years for the development of a provincial econometric fore casting model. Next, on to the question of the amount of over drafts. As at February 5th, 1982, we were in the posi tion of being in the largest short-term borrowing posi tion against our line of credit.

We were overdrawn at that time by $4.446 million and there were promissory notes in the amount of $1 14.9 million at that point. On March 31st, 1982, there is $9,222, 000 overdraft and promissory notes outstanding of $2 8,3 00, 000 -(Interjection)- March 31st is what you want? March 31 st overdrafts of $9,222,000; promissory notes outstanding, $28,300,000; total, $37,52 2,000.00. I believe those were the three questions which were outstanding at 4:30 -(Interjection)- No, $4,466,0 00 overdraft and $114,900,000 promissory notes, for a total of $119,366, 000.00. 2193 MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. A. BRIAN RANSOM (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Chairman, some of that information comes as a bit of a surprise to me, of course, the item dealing with the promissory notes and overdrafts. When I ask the Min ister of Finance a question a few days ago about the possibility of some additional borrowings my ques tion to the Minister of Finance had been, can the Minister of Finance advise the House whether he plans to be going to the markets with another bond issue shortly. Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Finance came back at the time and said, Mr. Speaker, the

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 question is one that the former Mini ster of Finance should well know the answer to. When we came into government, because of the fact that there hadn't been suffici ent borrowi ng to keep up where we were, we were several hundred of millions of dollars in short-term loans for the year 19 81 -82. Mr. Chair man, I wonder if the Minister could then advise me as to what date, since November 30, they came in when the government had several hundreds of millions of dollars in short-term and promissory notes outsta nding. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Chair man, as the member probably is aware the numbers I just finished giving were the governments direct promissory notes and overdrafts. In addition to that there were many mil lions of dollars in overdrafts and promissory notes outstanding from the Crown corporatio ns, specifi cally Hydro and Telephone. I don't have the exact number here but I believe that number would stand. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Chair man, was there anything unusual about the overdrafts of Crown corporations? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Chair man, what was happen ing was that the government was financing in short term markets rather than long term because of the interest rate situation at the time.

There was inh er ently wrong, I would agree, with doing that, however, there should have been no doubt in the members mind about why it was that we required long term funding when we had those short-term commi tments and it was only a very sensible approach when we had the opportunity to get the long-term funding, to turn those promissory notes and overdrafts into long-term debt rather than that type of short-term debt for the many obvious reasons, so I don't suggest that it was improper at the time to do so.

I do suggest that the former Mi nister was well aware that was why we were going and there were - I'm not saying that it was the Member for Turtle Mounta in, but I am saying that there was innuendo coming from the Opposition that somehow we were going to the market to borrow money before something supposedly happened here and we would have the money before some event happened here. That clearly was wrong. It was clearly known by the member that we needed this. We should go when the time was right to turn that into long-term debt. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Chairm an, in his perusal of the files, discussion with senior staff, has the Minister had any ind ication that the government, prior to November 30th, had been advised that the borrowing require ments, the capital requirements were going to be dif ferent than what were set down in the budget of 19 81? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Chairma n, as I understand it - no, I can't say that I have a piece of paper that says that the former government had knowledge that we required so much capital, although I suppose that if they would have taken out a pencil and figured out how much capital was required, they could have come up with those numbers. What I am told, as well, is that the rationale by the department last year when the numbers were set for the budget was that the long-term market didn't look very good at the time and so they didn't show a large amount of long-term borrowi ng.

They show it, and in fact they intended to go on short-terrri market because of the long-term conditio ns. Later on things changed; because of a few openings in the market, we went in . Well, the first one wasn't an opening of the market; the first one, as the member kno ws, was a refunding. The one in New York certainly was an opening and the Alberta one came along and we took it because of the favourable rates and because we needed the money. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Chair man, I want to assure the Mi nister that to the best of my knowledge, the projec tions that were made for 19 81 were accurate projec tions and as far as I knew at the end of November they still stood. I think that perhaps the characterization of the Minister, when he referred in his answer in a rather flippant way, that he said we had the Mi nister in charge of overdrafts down here. I think that the Mi nis ter perhaps should be aware, in fact, that information was not known to the previous government prior to the end of November. Mr.

Chairma n, I would like some additional infor mation then as to why the funding for the general programs of government has gone up from an esti mated $10 0 million to $289 million when the basis of the last Quarterly Report, the actual revenues of gov ernment were still run ning ahead of what had been pla nned by almost $8 millio n. What has happened to require the additional $18 9 million to finance gov ernment programs? MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Chair man. The projected deficit for the year was $264 million.

In addition to that, the $25 million which is taken out of the Special Emergency Mu nicipal Loans Fund or whatever the full name of that former fund is , that money was not available in cash, it is there in investments. Although the money is there in terms of the year '81 -82, the $25 million cash was still short. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Turtle Mounta in. 2194 MR. RANSOM: Mr. Chair ma n, that's something that I assume that the staff were aware of when the Budget was drawn up a year ago.

But assuming that they weren't aware of that and that we had to make allow ance for that $25 million then there's still another $16 5 million to be accou nted for. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairm an, part of that expla nation is as the member will recall, the projected total deficit for the year originally stood at $219 millio n. At thetime of the '81 -82 Budget it was determi ned by the department that they would expect to borrow $10 0 million of that on a long-term market and finance short about $12 0 million.

Since then, there has been an addition of approximately $45 million in an increase in the projected deficit as per the various financ ial statements that have been produced. MR. RANSOM: Is the projected deficit now then in the range of $265 million still?

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 MR. SCHROEDER: Yes. Mr. Chairman, to the best of our knowledge. Of course, we'll have a final figure at the end of June. MR. RANSOM: So, Mr. Chairman, then on the basis of the $25 million that it wasn't available in liquid cash in that Special Muncipal Loans Fund and a $45 million increase in the deficit, it amounts to $70 million. Then the other $1 19 million had intended to be financed on short-term rather than going to market? MR. SCHROEDER: That is what I'm informed by staff occurred last year, yes. MR.

RANSOM: In terms of the requirement for Mani toba Hydro, the Minister said I believe, that revenues were down. Is that $63 million reduction in revenue from what was anticipated by Manitoba Hydro? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman. there was an addi tional factor involved and that was. that there was more capital spending done last year by Hydro than was anticipated as the member would be aware. There's a substantial over-authority for Hydro. There was plenty of authority for them to spend more money on capital items and Hydro did so last year so the two factors are combined.

I don't have the exact number for the decrease in revenue as a result of the water levels, etc .. but that was substantial. MR. RANSOM: What about the MTS? There's a $14 ,000 requirement there that's greater than had been anticipated. To what can that be attributed? In the area of unfunded advances, there's $40 million of unfunded advances. What is the explanation of that? MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, the $40 mil lion first of all as of March 31, 19 81, there had been advances to Crown corpora tions in that amount which were unfunded, they were simply advances to those Crown corporations.

During the year the pro11r ince borrowed money on behalf of the corporations and turned those funds into funded advances where the utility or the Crown corporation would be liable for repayment. With respect to the $14 million overspending or additional funding required for MTS. I am advised that the bulk of that would also have been made up by a greater amount of capital spending in the year, although some of it may also have come from a reduced cash flow. MR. RANSOM: Well, Mr. Chairman, I'm still not clear on the unfunded advances to Crown corporations.

To which Crown corporations were the advances made and is that amount in addition then to the amounts that we've already discussed with respect to Hydro and Manitoba Telephone System? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, I can get a break down of that but as I understand it, there wasn't an additional amount of funds paid to those particular Crown corpo rations on that $40 mil lion number and it was probably mostly to Manitoba Hydro. Just borrow ing money on the long term on behalf of the particular Crown corporation rather than having the money advanced from the government to the Crown corporation. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Chairman, I wonder if the Minister could then tell us why that sort of bor rowing was not anticipated, is this a change in the method of opera tion of the Department of Finance? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, there have been no changes in policy at a political level nor in the departmental level. I understand it's part of the ongo ing process. MR. RANSOM: Then what occurred during the year to result in the $40 million being advanced in unfunded basis when the projection was for a nil advance. MR.

SCHROEDER: Did the member ask why there was $40 million in unfunded advances paid to the Crown corporations in the year, because that isn't what happened. What happened was that unfunded advances were turned into funded advances you could say. MR. RANSOM: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I understood that when the Minister gave us the figures when we began tonight that there was an additional $40 million required for what I had taken as unfunded advances to Crown corporations, when the projection had been for a nil amount in that area of borrowing require ment. Perhaps I misunderstood the information the Minister gave.

MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, maybe what we can do is get a complete answer to this within the next half-hour or hour or so if staff can come up with all of the explanations. I'm sure the explanations are there. I'm sure they will make sense when they've been provided. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. HARRY ENNS (Lakeside): Mr. Chairman, I perused the Estimates and I'd like to raise a matter that I don't think I can find a particular line for.

Unless the Ministe r objects I'd like to raise it now under the broad heading that this section, I believe, affords me which talks about providing directions, control and coordination and advises the government on fiscal policy. I wish to discuss briefly with him the arrange ments the government has entered into with respect to the Credit Union Stabilization Fund. 2195 Mr. Chairman. I'd like to preface my remarks by simply indicating to the Honourable Minister that the opposition has indicated and is certainly generally supportive of the government's position on this mat ter.

I'd like to indicate and certainly put on the record that the previous administration was equally aware and equally concerned about the problems facing the Credit Union movement in Manitoba. I'm somewhat concerned about the escalation of figures in the sense that we have, and I can recall in fact being the Minister responsible in receiving very early on in the life of the administration that I had the privilege of being part of. and I refer back to the fall of 19 77 when, as Minister of

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 Highways, for instance, and Minis ter of Government Services, initial requests were made by the Credit Uni on Central people about whether or not the gov ernment could be helpful in terms of meeting some of the overhead problems that they had with respect to their central office building here in downtown Win nip eg.

Without indicating that the Credit Union received any kin d of special consideration, but cer tainly they received a lot of support in seeing that a maj or department of government, the department that I was responsible for, such as the Department of Highways, moved into the Central Credit Union office tower, that was presented to us and to myself as Min ister at that time as being one way that the Provincial Go vernment could assist the movement in meeting some of their overhead obligations that they had in respect to that building.

I know that the Mini ster is familiar with latter plans and I want to put on the record that these were initia ted, by and large, by the Credit Unio n people themselves. They came to us with di fferent innovative approaches as to how the Provincial Government may be helpful to the Credit Union movement in their difficulties and I think we all acknowledge that the Credit Union movement didn't get into diffic ulty from October 17 , 1981 to now. It's a serious matter of con cern that the previous administration was very responsive to and certainly prepared to respond.

All I'm trying to put on the record is that there were different initia tives presented to the government of the day. One had to do with the possible purchase of the building and at that tim e we were talking in terms of $11 million or $12 million. We now have had the announcement by the Premier, by the First Minis ter, of a $20-odd million loan guarantee, so I think there has to be some concern about the kind of escalation of the concern. I have some specific questions to the Honourable Minis ter and I want to indic ate to him that as I started these remarks with, that we are supportive of this program.

I simply want to ask him, have the actual arrangements been concluded with the Central Credit Board with respect to the announcement made by the Premier some three or four weeks ago? MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Don Scott (lnkster): The Honourable Minis ter. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, this mi ght be a good poi nt, I thought the member was putting some thing on the record that he wished to put on the record with respect to that matter.

He may not be aware of it but it's the Minis ter of Co-operative Development who is in charge of that and that's the reason why there is no line on that in the Department of Fin ance Estimat e. The Min ister of Co-operative Development is the one of whom questions should be asked. I cannot say whether all arrangements in terms of transfer of funds have been concluded. I do know that since last December, there have been several reports prepared, the first of which was requisiti oned by the previous government, the Scarth Report; there was a study done by Alan Scarth.

There was another study done by another individ ual - I can't recall his name. but both individ uals fully supported, as I understand it, the arrangements which were made by the Provincial Government because there apparently was an escala tion in the diffic ulties over a period of a year or more. I should pull that back - more than a year ago, there was less evidence of the problems than there was now. There were some clear signs of problems that hadn't surfaced and when the reports were in, it was felt that this was the amount of money that was required to ensure the adequacy and safety of the system.

Now, I don't know whether final arrange ments have been made. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the fact that the Minis ter poin ted out the Min ister of Co-operative Development is the lead Minis ter in terms of negotiat ing the arrangements but, Sir , this Min ister is the keeper of the keys of the money box. We're not talking small dollars and I would like to think, I would like to sleep more soundly tonight knowing that he knows what kind of arrangements are being concluded.

I take it from the Minis ter's answer that as far as he is concerned, as far as the Minister of Fin ance is con cerned of this provi nce, you have not received final and definitive instructions either from your colleague, the Minis ter of Co-operative Development as to pre ci sely how the details of how the $20-odd milli on, what the final arrangements, in fact, are. 2196 MR. SCHROEDER: No, Mr. Chairman, I recognize that the member wants to sleep soundly knowing that all funds are being duly looked after.

I have to say to him that once we make decisions as to a procedure, then we do have to leave certain processes with the individ ual Minis ters involved. Once the Fin ance Min ister is told that $50 million is needed for hig hways construct ion, he doesn't supervise the hig hways con struction; that's then up to the Minis ter of Highways.

Simi larly, once we make a commit ment with respect to an agreement with the Credit Union system, then it is up to the Mini ster in charge of the Credit union system, and I assure the memberthat with the capable Minis ter of Co-operative Development in charge that he can rest quite easily and that Minis ter will protect him. MR. ENNS: Well, Mr. Chairman, things do change.

I want to tell the Minis ter, I could never be assured of building one mile of highway before I knew that I had the dollars from my Minis ter of Fin ance. how they were comin g; where they were coming; whether they were shared with Ottawa or not. It was only then that I could make public pronouncements, actually print a hig hways building project because I knew I had $60 mil lion, $80 million or $70 million to build hig hways in the Province of Manitoba.

I think the Min ister is degrading his role, his responsibility for the finances of this province in sug gesting to me that although the appropriate Min ister is charged with the responsibility of carrying out the actual negotiations, but he cannot - unless things have really changed and obviously they have - unless he has had his clear indications from the Department of Fin ance as to how the project will be funded. Well, Mr. Chairman, I'll leave that particular subject. I have one or two other concerns in the same vein, Mr. Chairman. One of the problems of having been in this

Tuesday, 4 May, 1982 place a little too long is, of course, I remember another NDP Minis ter of Finance, the Honourable Saul Cherniack, waxing eloquently and, indeed, pass ing legislation that would make it possible for the province to get dire ctly into the banking and money business in the form of Provincial Treasury Branches.

I would like to hear from the Minis ter's own lips, eyeball to eyeball, cheek to cheek, jowl to jowl, that this supportive move on the part of this government with respect to the Credit Union organization is not, in fact, a sneaky way of getting into the banking bu si ness as a government; that he has no intentions of subverting the Credit Union societies in this province and, indeed, dusting off old provincial legislation that a former colleague of his brought into this Chamber and passed, namely, that would allow the Provincial Government to get into Provincial Treasury Branches. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Chairman, all I can say is, that if one were to consider a scenario of subverting a system, it would hardly be the scenario of lending that system $29.5 million interest free for five years. One would think that if somebody wanted to subvert me, I suppose I'd be subject to the subversion. If somebody knows of someone who is prepared to lend me $29.5 million interest free for five years, I'd be pleased to meet that indivi dual.

I can assure the member that there is every intention on the part of this government to assure the stab ility and ability of the Credit Union movement to funct ion and for it to strengthen itself and to strengthen our community in being stronger. MR. ENNS: Certainly I, and some 300,000-odd Credit Union members of this province are pleased to hear that from the Minis ter. Mr.

Chairman, though, I want to persist in that line of questioning for a moment because I seem to recall that, in making this arrange ment with the Credit Union Stab ilization Fund, the government reserved for itself the rig ht to the appoin tment of some directors to that stabiliz ation board. Is the Minis ter familiar enough with that announcement that Premier Pawley made that there lik ely would be some government appoi ntees to the Central Credit Unio n Stab ilization Fund Board of Directors? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, I don't recall the details.

I recall the discussion, but it seems to me that there may well be a provision that would give the government the right to have one or two di rectors on the board. I don't believe that it is a majority; I believe that it is a minority. I also do not believe that there have been any moves made in that direction by the government at this point. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, the Minis ter may now understand the machinations of my mind. You see, if the government by this action now assumes or if it's conditi onal upon the gove

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-47b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 47b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	90752c514fbcd4361fbd1e1895ea44425e146a37

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