Manitoba Hansard — 24 April 1980 (Sitting 44B, 31st Legislature, 4th Session)

31-4-44b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thu rsday, 24 April, 1980. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - CONSUMER AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Jim Galbrai th (Dauphin): I call the committee to order. We are on Resolution 38, 5. (aX1) - the Member for Logan. MR. WILLIAM JENKINS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister was raising a point this afternoon in discussion with the Member for Churchill and I would like to ask the Minis ter ju st what educ ational programs has the department prepared, or is it preparing programs for the education of the general public and especially our younger people, in order that these people who will be our consumers and producers of pollution in the world that they will shortly inherit, I wonder if the Min ister and his department is producing, or has produc ed an educational program, say, for the school children. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor (Virden): The Honourable Minister. HON. HARRY J. ENNS (Lakeside): Yes, Mr . Chairman. In response to my honourable friend's ques tion, the department has and continues to respond to requests from schools for speakers, to organizations and the like whenever speakers are asked to deal with either the general subject of the environment or specific subjects, and we respond to those requests as often as we receive them. I might also say that I'm sure that the thought has occurred to my honou rable· friend that a more extensive program of public information should be made available.

So it is our intention to add to the staff of the department an information officer that will attempt to correlate that kind of information and to attempt to provide an ongoing program of education and information about environ mental matters to the public. I might just add that in response to his request about requests for speakers, I'm advised that we respond to about 100 requests a month on various subjects relating to environmental matters. MR. JENKINS: Would the position that is shown here under Environmental Management, Program Dev elopment and Review, a director vacant.

Would this be where the Minister is intending to fill the person that he's talking about? MR. JORGENSON: Well, Mr. Chairman, before .. MR. JENKINS: And I don't want to get down to that. MR. JORGENSON: No. I'd like to respond to that question in this way. We have just begun a process of reorganization of the department and part of that reorganization will be a directorate that will be responsible for information and education programs. So although it is not shown in the estimates as yet, the reorganization chart will show a change in that direction. MR.

JENKINS: This afternoon, the Minister was dealing with these guidelines and objectiv es.

I am particularly interested in the field of noise pollution and I wonder if the Minister, before we leave the item altogether and I don't expect that they'll have it this evening, but I wonder if the staff could prepare what is the recommended guidelines and objectives of the decibels of nois e as sugges ted or recommen ded by the Comm ission for, say , residential areas, semi-reside ntial, light indlJStrial, heavy ind ustrial, agriculture, semi-agriculture, and especially the city streets of major thoroug hfares, and if that sort of data was available it would be appreciated. MR. JORGENSON: Mr.

Chairman, I will endeavour to have that information prepared for my honourable friend; I am sure it must be available somewhere. MR. JENKINS: The storage of hazardous and toxic materials; do the y come under this department, Mr. Chairman? MR. JORGENSON: I beg your pardon? MR. JENKINS: The storage of toxic and hazardous materials which I think the province does store some at the Gimli Industrial Park; are they under this department - the control.

I believe when we were dealing with the Government Services, he lead us to believe that while it was the physical property for storage that was under his department - the space, the control of tha t was un der Environm ental Management, and if that is correct I have a few questions for the Minister. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, we have the responsibility for determ ining what materials will be placed in storage at the storage centre at Gimli and I might add it's essentially, almost exclusively I would think, waste material from government departments.

We don't store any private stuff in there; it's government departments waste that's stored at Gimli, hazardous materials. MR. JENKINS: That is strictly government waste, hazardous toxic materials, that we're storing there. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, government departments and institutions, hospitals and the like. MR. JENKINS: Yes. These storage tanks; how far are they situated away from inhabited areas - and what I'm think ing of in particular is Aspen Park Lodge, which is on the old airforce site. Does the Minister have any idea of how close or how far and 2897

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. what precautions are posted in the area for the residents because I under stand there might be some small children around there in that area? MR. JORGENSON: I don't know whether I have that precise information as to distances located from residential areas. I am advised that it's something like 700 to 1, 000 feet away from the park. I'm sure my honourable friend is aware that the area is pretty thoroughly fenced. MR. JENKINS: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This afternoon the Minister was sayin� that when industry intr oduc es new processes that may pollute the environment, what has been th e record? Do companies that are, say, going to introduce a new manufacturing process that may produce hazardous or toxic waste, do th ey contact the Clean Environ ment Commission as a rule, or the department, to see if there are guidelines set out by the Commission in order to control the pollutants that may be discharged into the atmosphere? And what has been the record? Do we have some industries that do this or are there some that the department is not aware of? MR.

JORGENSON: There is no requirement that they approach the branch. But it has been the practice, almost invariably, that they do appear before the department to attempt to deter mine what environmental regulations they may be su bjected to, the level of emissions, etc., so that they have some idea of how to plan their operation. I might add that the announc ement that was made the other day about potash development, they've already approached the department for information regarding their dev elopment.

Again, there is about 100 requests a month from different companies enquiring about information, and they do this in their own interests, because I think they believe that it's in their best interests to know just what standards they will be subjected to and what regulations there is to live under. MR. JENKINS: The hazardous materials that are being stored at the Gimli Ind ustrial Site, how do we dispose of them event ually? Is this a resp onsibility of the Clean Environm ent Comm ission or what department of government determines where they will go to?

And ju st how are some of these hazardous and toxic materials finally disposed of? MR. JORGENSON: A great deal depends on the particular material itself. There are some industries that can use some of the material that is deposited there and when we do have material that can be used by industry arrangements are made for them to take it away and use it. In other instances we have disposed of a certain amount of that material to the United States and more recently we have contr acted with Kinetic Contaminants to move some material out. MR.

JENKINS: I jus t wonder if the Minister happened to watch a television program, oh I'd say th ree or four months ago, I'm not sure if it was on Prairie Public Television or whether it was on Channel 13, where there has sprung up, I think in the United Kingdom, an industry that takes hazardous toxic materials and then reconverts them back into usable chemicals in many cases and sells them back to other industries. Does he know of any similar firms - I don't know whether there would be any in Manitoba but would there be any on the North American continent? Is the Minister aware of that? MR.

JORGENSON: My honourable friend speaks of an interesting subject, not only in England but there are such disposable facilities in France and Bavaria I believe is another one. Kinetic Contaminants of Alberta have applied to the environmental branch in the province of Alberta for the construction of a hazardous waste disposal plant. That plant, modelled after the one in Bavaria, will dispose of practically every hazardous waste without dama ge to th e environment. We have, as one can probably readily ascertain, the big problem insofar as Manitoba is concerned, is the transportation of those products to the plant.

Kinetic Contami nants have their own specially designed trucks that are almost accident proof, specially trained dri vers who pick up the material and put it in storage at their storage plant in Alberta.More recently there have been, and I can't ident ify any particular process, but one reads from time to time of new proc esses tha t are being developed for the destruction of hazardous wastes. Now I have no id ea how effective these new te chniq ues are or whether th ey will ever be commercially acceptable.

The rotary kiln device, which is the one that is in use in Bavaria and the one that Kinetic Contaminants have applied to construct will handle all types of hazardous wastes, as opposed to some of the others that will only handle certain types. So perhaps they may be the ide al way although it's albeit somewhat cost ly.

They are intending, if their licence to construct such a plant in Alberta and the cost is somewhat high, something in excess of 20 million to build such a plant, if they are successful in their application to build in Alberta they then intend to construct a storage place in the province of Manitoba, where we can deliver our hazardous wastes at such a time as they come through with their truck to pick it up and haul it to the disposal plant.

I think my honourable friend can readily see that that kind of a cost, 20 million and up, of a construction of a plant, there isn't enough hazardous wastes in one province to warrant the construction of such a plant. So perhap s it is prefer able, and we have had meetings of the five provinces, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia.

I attended a meeting in Edmonton a few months ago on this very subject with a view to determ ining the pract icability of dev eloping a system where a storage would be built in each of the provinces and the disposal plant be located in one province, so that you would have an economic system of disposal of wastes. When I say economic, it's by no means cheap, because the costs of transportation is fairly high but it would be an effective way of disposing of that type of waste.

Now, that does not mean that all wastes will go in it; there's certain types of waste that can be recycled, as my honourable friend has suggested. There are other types of wastes that can be used in various forms; glass bottles, for example. Ways have been found of commercially using that 2898

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. material; old tires and paper, as my honourable friend knows, can be recycled. That requir es a system that you sort and classify the various types of wastes into different categories. Some of it can be disposed on the local level, some can be disposed of in a regional basis and others still can be disposed of on a provincial level. The hazardous waste-type will, I think, necessitate a more regional type of disposal, such as I mentioned with Kinetic Contaminan ts in Alberta.

So the question is to devise a system that enables you to collect th ese wastes and designate them to their proper recycling or disposal plants. In that way, one can get the best and most effective means of preventing the landfill sites of having to accept this type of wastes in areas where perhaps it is not as effective a means of disp osal as th e recyc ling method. I think my honour able friend is aware of on e instance, for example, in, was it St. James or St. Vital? One school in the city saved about 80 percent of their cost of heating that school by using waste material.

It gives us some idea of how we can convert what is today a waste material into an energy resource, and what we envision as a waste disposal program is that multiple use. Rather than considering waste as a nuisance to be disposed of, it can be considered as a resource to be used for the benefit of mankind. That not only applies to the hazardous wastes, the old tires, bottles and things like that, but it can apply to effluent as well. In some countries it's used very effectively as irrigation, fertilizer, etc.

We have a long way to go to dev eloping an effective waste disposal system but I think the objective is there for us to reach. I come back to a statement that I made earlier today when I said that it does require the co-operation of all groups in society. Unless there is an und erstanding of the reasons why you are carrying on such a program, there's not likely to be the kind of co-operation that one would like to see.

When I say all groups, I mean that the energy or the waste generators have a responsibility and that includes not only industry, that includes the general public have a responsibility in assisting in an effective waste disposal program. I know perhaps it's a long ways away but it is a program that I think is worthy of achieving because it will result not only in a more effective use of waste as an energy source, but as a means of ensuring that our environment is kept reasonably clean it can be even more effective.

So we attempt to move in that direction, but I tell my honourable friend right now that without the full knowledge of why you are doing such a thing and without the co-operation of everyone concerned, it's going to be a long way in achieving that goal. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Member for Logan. MR.

JENKINS: I thank the Honourable Minister for sharing those thoughts with us and, basically, that was what I was leading up to when I asked if he was dev eloping a program, especially I would see the program geared to our younger people, the young people who are now in the schools, that we impress upon them that they will be the consumers of the future. They will be also the pollutors of the future and it behooves us to make sure that they're aware of the environment and how we can protect it.

I'm very interested in the plant that the Minister tells me that is in the discussion stage, and I can quite realize that the one I saw on television was one that was in the industrial midlands of England. Of course, it was short hauling distanc es and they had the speci ally developed tanke r tr ucks pract ically foolproof for hauling the pollutant materials, the hazardous toxic materials and, in fact, they generated their own energy from the waste materials.

So it was in that respect I guess it was maybe not as profitable as they would have liked it to have been but it was working and I can quite see, with our scattered population, that it would have to be set up on a regional basis. I thank the Minister for giving us the benefit of the negotiations and meetings that he's atten ded.

I hope that he will in future make us aware if any changes and any dev elopments come about because I can assure him, that I think we all, as members of the Legislature and the public in general, should be aware of and interested in seeing that this type of a program, which I think in the long run, especially since I heard the other day that now industry is bec oming very interested in some of th e, not precious metals, but some of the metals that are in short supply that they are now wanting to reclaim, because the mines that we have mined with gay abandon for so many years, some places are petering out and it may eventually become more economical to recycle.

I think there has been cases where they've had mercury recyclation, they have found out that it had been cheaper, when they had put in the controls, to recycle than to buy some of the new materials that have been involved. So it is encouraging th at governments and industry are becoming more aware and I hope and I wish the Minister well in his educational program and I hope that we will hear more of the program, especially of the production of a hazardous and toxic material reclamation plant that is being talked about. MR. JORGENSON: Thank you very much.

There is one thing I should point out in this connection and it highlights, I believe, the necessity of making sure that the public generally are aware of what you are doing. It means, I hate call it an educa tional program, but perhaps I should say an awareness program. I recall a few years ago the city of Winnipeg end eavoured to get people to sort their garbage so that it would be easier to channel it into various means of disposal. The program was an abysmal failure because people just refused to do it.

I think the reason it was a failure was because the public generally perceive this as ju st anothe r bureaucratic order that was designed to relieve the garbage collector of a little extra work. That was not the intention at all. It was, I think, a sincere attempt to try to get the public to co-operate in a program that would enable them to dispose of wastes in the most efficient method. I'm convinced that had there been a program of education or awareness preceding that order that it might have been acceptable.

If people understand why you're doing things and the reasons why it's necessary to do those things, I believe you'd get that 2899

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. kind of co-operation, particularly today, because there is certainly a greater awareness of the need for proper disposal of wastes than there ever has been before. Now one other point before we leave thi s, Mr. Chairman. Alberta has, by virtue of the fact that the need is greater in that province because of industrial dev elopment, of course, has taken the lead in this whole question of hazardous waste disposal. They have now produc ed a film on this whole question.

We have a copy of that film and we intend to be reviewing it and I would like to invite my honourable friends to that viewing if they would like to see it We'll certainly make it available to the members and we'll let you know the time and the date of its showing. I'm sure you'll find it very interesting. MR. JENKINS: Well, I thank the Minister very much for the offer and I'm sure that I can speak on behalf of my colleagues that we'll certainly accept with pleasure. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Kildonan. MR. PETER FOX: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Before I start I want to apologize in case I'm going to touch on something that's already been covered. The educational part or awareness intrigues me and I just wondered whether the Minister has already answered whether his awareness program is slanted towards industry or to the public in general, and what is its major thrust? Is it just for hazardous products or is it for all other environmental debilitating factors? MR. JORGENSON: I think, as I said earlier, we respond to all requests. We respond to whatever subject that the schools may want us to deal with.

If any particular school wants someone to speak on any particular subject we will deal with that We will also deal with the general subject of waste disposal. MR. FOX: So it's on request, is that it? It's not . MR. JORGENSON: Yes. MR. FOX: The department does not have a program of its own aside from requests? MR. JORGENSON: Well, as I mentioned earlier and I know my honourable friend is covering ground that has been covered before, but for his information I'll tell him tha t we are no w in the process of a reorganization of the department which will have, as one

section of that department, an information program. It is our intention to carry on a much more intensive program of public awareness on the whole question of waste. I think I should point out that the younger generation are becoming keenly conscious of the environment and they're the people that are, perhaps more than anyb ody, asking for mor e information. They are wanting to become aware of what the problems are.

I think perhaps they hear so much about it and it's vague in their minds, they want to be a little more informed and we're happy to respond to that kind of a demand for information and we intend to carry out, as I say, a far more intensive program once we have the reorganization of the department completed. MR. FOX: Yes, I appreciate that and especially since I have a couple of children of my own at the university level who constantly tell me that we haven't done enough to save the environment for them as they're growing up.

I tell them I hope they have more success than we've had in trying to get at this problem because it's not a simple issue. In respect to effluents going into our disposal system, I recall Metro used to have a regular monthly monitoring of this and I'm not aware that it's still being done. Has this been discontinued? I know that a numb er of indus tries used to have a monthly monitoring as to the number of solids they could have in their effluents, the packing houses and other industrial outlets. MR. JORGENSON: You're speaking of the city of Winnipeg, I presume. MR.

FOX: Yes, but there are also plants outside of the city of Winnipeg, as well, so I would imagine the branch would be involved in that. MR. JORGENSON: I'm sure that is a fact but I will just wait for . . . Every application for sewage disposal is approved by the department and we continue to monitor their effluent. In the case of the city of Winnipeg, they retain their own monitoring rights and so although they have the standards, they carry on their own monitoring program. So I suppose the response to my honourable friend's question is that, yes, that monitoring is continued on a regular basis. MR.

FOX: Is the standard set by the Environmental Commission or by the city itself? MR. JORGENSON: Not for the city of Winnipeg, no. MR. FOX: Not for the city; so therefore there are no standards for the city of Winnipeg. MR. JORGENSON: The city of Winn ipeg have retained control over their own water qua lity standards. They continue to retain that control.

I might add that, as a part of a series of stud ies that are taking place in the various watershed districts, there will be hearings cond ucted this year on the Red River Basin, and individuals and organizations will have an opport unity to make presentations before tha t commi ttee and that will include, of course, the city of Winnipeg. So those studies are scheduled to begin sometime in summer and fall, late summer and fall. MR.

FOX: I realize that there's an improvement in the Red River's quality because friends of mine who live along the river say that fish are starting to come back, but there still is a certain amount of disposal takes place between the border and Winnipeg. Can the Minister indicate as to whether there are any definite plans to eliminate that kind of dumping along the Red River? Because if we don't, it will never get cleaned up. 2900

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. MR. JORGENSON: The sewage disposal plants along the reaches of the Red River are pretty rigidly controlled and, as I say, they are monitored from time to time. It's not only from sewage disposal plants that the type of pollution that we find in the Red River comes from exclusively. There has been, as my honourable friend knows, a pretty marked change in the use of chemicals on agricultural lands which drain into the Red River. MR. FOX: They leach into the river. MR. JORGENSON: And that unquestionably will and does and have some impact.

It's one of the reasons why the series of hearings that are going to be held will be of some benefit because it will give us an idea then to what extent. The decision then as to what can be done or what needs to be done in order to improve quality then becomes obvious to all who use the river and it is hoped the public hearings, as they did in the Souris Basin Study last year, will be an education program in itself and will create a greater awareness of the kind of problem that we are facing with respect to pollution of the watershed. MR. FOX: Mr.

Chairman, in respect to industry such as pulp mills in other areas of the province, how often are they monitored, if they are monitored, or do they just get standards set and that's what they are supposed to abide by, and maybe they may be monitored and maybe they may not; they may have to do their own monitoring? MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Chairman, every Clean -Environment Commission order that is given, and that includes the pulp mills, is mon itored to ensure compliance. MR. FOX: By the department? MR. JORGENSON: Yes, to ensure compliance with the order.

There is an ongoing process of monitoring to ensure that the limits set by the Commission are not exceeded. MR. FOX: There is one other area of environment which interests me and that is that there are small towns all around Manitoba. Do they all get a form of monitoring? Who does the enforcing in the various small areas? Do they all have to make application before they start operations or do they just go ahead whether it's hog ranching or whatever, feed lot operation, and so on? MR. JORGENSON: That's right. MR. FOX: They all have to have permission. MR.

JORGENSON: As my honourable friend is probably aware, hearings are held on every application and people in the area, who want to make a submission before the Commission, have an opportunity of doing so, and those submissions are then considered in granting the order. I might say that the hearings that are held in the dif ferent watershed areas, not only is it an education program but it's prime pur pose is to come to some conclusions as to the setting of standards. What standards do the people in that area want for their water.

They believe that the quality of the water, in that particular watershed, is not high enough, but they want to see it higher. Then they have an opportunity of making that kind of submission and then they also have some idea of what may be necessary in order to improve that standard.So it is a two-way process, it gives the department an opportunity of hearing those submissions and at the same time it gives the people an opporunity of getting a better idea of the problems they are faced with.

We all have an idea there is a problem, my own particular case along the Red River, I recall as a boy there was no difficulty in putting a diving board at the edge of the river and using it for swimming. After the initial breakup the water cleared up and stayed clear the rest of the year. Today you can almost float on it and I think a lot of people are concerned about it and I think a lot of people want to know just really what causes it. The purpose of those hearings and th ose stud ies is to attempt to arrive at th at conclusion and to make sure that the evidence is made public.

Now my honourable friend asked questions about livestock production operations and I might say in that connection they are controlled by regulation. There are certain specific limits and standards that are set which they cannot exceed. In addition to that, of course, are the hearings if people in a giv en area object to the construction of a livestock operation in their area, and they can prove there is sufficient grounds for their object ion, then those objections are taken into consideration. MR. FOX: Well I thank the Min ister for that information.

The reason I asked is because there is also a possibility that some of these operations may not get into the rivers and streams but they will soak into our water table through leaching action and so on; because I recall a couple of years ago we used to have a problem out in East St. Paul in respect to bad tasting well waters because something had got into the system - I don't know whether they ever did trace where it came from but I notice that lately we haven't heard about it.

That brings me to another area that just recently - I can't recall exactly how long ago - there was a reported oil slick on the Seine River (Int erjection)- it was in today's . . . no I read it earlier; or sludge of some kind - and I jus t wondered what kind of detective work is done to determine where it came from and what is the enforcement that takes place afterwards because somebody or other has vio lated and dump ed something otherwise it wouldn't be visible. Can the Minister tell the commit tee what the procedure is in this kind of an instance? MR.

JORGENSON: When an incident of that nature occurs of cou rse our department will beg in an immediate investigation. What we endeavour to do is to trace it, we can't always do that. Sometimes it is very difficult to trace the source but where we can then we will take action to correct it; sometimes after it is discovered in an aquifer it is too late unless there is some way of preventing further leaching into the aquifers. With respect to the particular problem that my honourable friend mentioned specifically, that oil 2901

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. slick in the Seine River, I am advised that they have traced that back to -(I nterject ion)- we think, we better not be too definite because sometimes these things are a little bit deceptive in tracing; we think it is a result of some action on the part of the CNR . MR. FOX: I see.

Another area I would like to explore with the Minister, and that is, occasionally you read about some wildlife or fish being - whatever happens to th em they die - not necessarily on this side of the border, but south of the border and yet debris and waste will come through to us because the stream flows north. I know we have an International Water Commission that regulates these thing s, but what does the Environment Commission do in that regard? Does it first of all determine what happened and then go to the International Board, or do we just turn it over to the board to begin with? MR.

JORGENSON: As my honourable friend may know an international waterway comes under the jurisdiction of the federal government, and I am aware of at least one of the incidents my honourable friends refers to as sludge, or a slug they call it, that came from, we believe it was a sugar refinery at Gr afton, No rth Dakota. I remember it corni ng through, we had word of it approaching Morris, and by the tim e it got to Morris it had dis sipated somewhat, the effects were not as severe nor did they last as long as they were in Emerson.

Att the time they reached there it was impossible to use the water; they were hauling water for about a week into Emerson because they could not use the water that was affected by the slug. Those are problems that occur from time to time and they are dealt with on the federal level. MR. FOX: So th ey are jus t reported to th e International Joint Water Commission and they take it up. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, well there is a Red River Pollution Board of which we are a member and it is that Board that deals with those particular problems, and as I am told reports to the International Joint Commission. MR.

FOX: I just have one more area I would like to explore with the Honourable Minister and that is, I was interested in what he was saying about the fact that there was some study being done in respect to recycling of wastes and so on, that there had to be a greater awareness of it. I do recall a number of years ago, not too long, in fact about three or four, I had occasions to visit the U of M, where a Dr. Gallop was doing - I believe that's his name . . . MR. JORGENSON: Yes, Dr. Gallop. MR. FOX: . . . was doing a tremendous amount of work into the recycling of waste as well as effluents.

My question to the Minister is: To what extent are we following up on this kind of work that has been done, on a very limited basis as I under stood it at that time because there were very limited funds; and secondly, in view of the fact that Winnipeg, because of its large size and because of the amount of waste that is generated, if there had been any kind of cost benefit study done to see whether there couldn't be utilized some recyc ling as well as some heat generation, because I unde rstand that the two go hand in hand, and I would certainly appreciate if the Minister could enlighten me a little more on that.

I know that the city of Winnipeg councillers did send a delegation over to Germany and Sweden, I believe, to have a look at it, but at that time or how long ago it was, about five or six years ago, they just didn't think that it would be feasible for the city alone to approach it. But in view of the fact that we are now becoming more conscious of the environment, more conscious of recyc ling and cons ervi ng and, of cou rse, using regenerative sources for heat and other energy forms, I just wondered whether the province is it all interested and is looking at it to see what can be done. MR.

JORGENSON: I am advised that the province shared in the funding of that particular project at the university, the Winnipeg Municipal Study. We are certainly interested in those projects. As a matter of fact, one of the energy research projects that had been going on at the Univ ersity is the production of methanol. The Department of Agriculture is very interested in that type of program and has worked with the university a great deal in attem pting to further develop it. We have co-operated , as a matter of fact, on all of these projects because we are concerned and interested in them.

I might say also in this connection that I'v e had some discussions with the Univ ersity of Manitoba along these very lines. We are interested in working on a co-operativ e basis. They have a tremendous amount of expertise at the university, I was told by Dr. Campbell, they would like to make av ailable to us on this very qu estion. In my di scussions with Dr. Campbell and part of his staff we outlined certain areas that we thought they may usefully make a contribution. So we have been carrying on these discussions. Dr.

Bowen is actively working with them now in an attempt to define the particular areas that they would like to work in and to provide assistance to us. I think it's a very useful way of making that kind of expertise avai lable to a gover nment department. We expect that we will have a great deal more co operation in the research and development almost on a one-to-one basis on various projects with the univ ersities. I look on this as a very useful way of bringing more expertise to bear on either what decisions we have to make or what projects we may be interested in working on.

The wider the selection of expertise, I think, the more likelihood is that you will reach successful conclusions at an earlier date. We look upon this as another step in att empting to insure that we have the best expertise possible available to us. MR. FOX: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Minister looking for the most and best expertise we can get but my specific question, and I will say it again, is are there any definitive studies, cost-benefit studies available yet? Have we gotten to any place where we can say, well we can sit down and have a look at it and say, well, this is what the costs are as 2902

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. of now, either in relation to the city of Winnipeg or to any particular size? MR. JORGENSON: I can outline two in particular. The one project at that particular school gave us a fairly good idea, to the extent that we can utilize waste as an energy, and another study that was done was the use of municipal waste in the city of Winnipeg. We now have a fairly good idea of what the savings are but we also have a fairly good idea of what the costs will be . . . MR. FOX: Are those reports available? MR.

JORGENSON: My unde rstanding is tha t Mclarens were the consultants on this particular project. Whether or not that report is available for distribution or not, I will have to check. I am not sure at the moment. I am reminded that there is a possibility we may require a city of Winnipeg approval for its release. MR. FOX: I didn't hear the Minister. MR. JORGENSON: I say we may require the city of Winnipeg approval for its release because it was a joint study with the city of Winnipeg. MR. FOX: Well, if the Minister has it, I would certainly appreciate having a look "at it. I think that's all I have at the moment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairmam. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Jim Galbraith, (Dauphin): The Honourable Member for Rossmere. MR. VIC SCHROEDER: I had a question of the Minister with respect to what I believe to be a gypsum mining operation north of Morris. I was just wondering whether th ere have been any water pollution problems resulting from that plant over the past several years. MR. JORGENSON: No, this particular question would come under the Department of Mines, but I can tell my honourable friend, because I was fairly close to it, as he might suspect, there was no particular water pollution problems.

That wasn't the difficulty. The difficulty was our mining inspectors had repeatedly told them that they were on the edge of an und erground aqu ifer, and that it would be necessary to grout in order to prevent seepage into the mine from the aquifer and thereby lowering the pressure of the water somewhere down around St. Pierre and Otter burne. As my honourable friend probably knows, there is a fairly active aquifer there of excellent quality water and it's the flowing type.

When the mine began to leak, th e water started coming up, the water pressure went down at the other end and the people who were using the water at the other end began to complain about lowered water pressure. Almost every farm made use of the water, as did some of the towns. Although we repeatedly attempted to get them to follow our advice to grout the floor of the mine, they didn't and then one night it just broke in and flooded, so the mine was just closed up for that reason. MR. SCHROEDER: Are there now no difficulties with the water pressure? MR. JORGENSON: Not to my knowlege.

I wouldn't want to be precise on that but I have heard no more complaints. MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, and that's been several years. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, that was, I think, two or three years ago that the mine was abandoned. MR. SCHROEDER: One other area that I was wondering about; I had asked the Minister about a month ago about an environmental impact study with respect to the area of Indian reserves, 39 and 40. I was just wondering how that's coming along. MR. JORGENSON: It is a federal project and they are the ones that are doing the study.

We are invo lved because we are co-operating with them because it does concern the province of Manitoba and there is a possiblity tha t we may have to intervene, but that study is underway. I'm not sure just how long it will be before it will be completed and the report made pu blic, but it is being undertaken now. MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, it is my und erstanding that this study is as a result of an application by the people at Indian Reserve 40 for sub-division into cottage lots of some property just to the immediate south of Indian Bay.

I am just wondering whether that is the case and, if that is the case, I am just wondering whether the province has any legal right to put a stop on the application; that is through the entire sub-division process is there some way in which the department resp onsible for the environment can stop that dev elopment if it is deemed to be not in the interests of Manitoba? MR. JORGENSON: Our legal advice tells us that's a rather fuzzy area. They are not sure themselves as to whether or not we would have the authority of stopping it.

We certainly have some concerns about it on behalf of the city of Winnipeg because it is from there that they draw their water supply and they naturally have a very active concern. Certainly, we will do what we can to insure that the legitimate interests of the city of Winnipeg are protected. MR. SCHROEDER: Thank you. Has the department done any studies which would indicate whether or not there would be any problem with sewage or any other di fficulties should this sub-di vision be approved? MR. JORGENSON: I guess our best hope at the moment is a federal environment assessment review process.

That will perhaps give us a better idea than anything else that could be done. MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, I understand as well that there has been an application by the reserve in Manitoba for a road connecting up from the reserve to Highway No. 1, and I am just wondering whether there is any area within that application whic h concerns the Department of the Environment. 2903

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. MR. JORGENSON: That matter really comes under the Crown Lands Department but we've advised the feds of our conc erns and tha t should be incorporated as a part of the review process. MR.

SCHROEDER: My un derst anding is th at currently the people on those reserves are residents of Ontario, as oppo sed to being res ident s of Manitoba, and that there is some conflict between them with respect to access and occasionally there are road blocks between the reserves but the road comes in from Highway No. 1 in Ontario, and this new road would give the reserve, which is partially in Manitoba, direct access to itself, whether or not the subdivision application is completed.

But beyond that I'm just wonde ring, although it's Crown land and it would be up to the Crown Lands Branch to finally determ ine whether the highway would be approved, is it not the case that any subdivision of property or any change in land use is generally referred to this department to determine whether such a change in use is in the best interests of the people in the province? MR. JORGENSON: Yes. The department is but one of the branches that are given an opportunity to make their views known on any application of that nature. MR.

SCHROEDER: Has the department done any studies with respect to cos ting, or have they even come anywhere near considering the cost of moving the aqueduct to another bay? Have there been any costs calculated on that? MR. JORGENSON: No. I am advised that there has been no studies along those lines. MR. SCHROEDER: Thank you. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Member for Churchill. The Ho nourable MR. JAY COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. Before going on to a new topic, I just had an opportunity over the dinn er hour, to go through some of my files and have been continuing to do so during th e dis cussion here.

While looking for something else, I ran across some

definitions that I would like to put into the record for the Minister's benefit if I can. They're from a Canada-Manitoba Accord for the Protection and the Enhancement of Environmental Quality and the provinc e and the federal government entered into an agreement in 1975 in regard to this. In the beginning, as in most agreement or treaties, we have

definitions, and I'd just like to read to the Minister the

definitions of guidelines, objectiv es and regulations, so that they are on the record from a more noted authority than myself, if I can. Guidelines, and I'm quoting from the treaty now, means recommended good practices to assist in achieving uniformity. Objectives means levels of environmental quality to be attained in either the short term or long term; and regulations mean any rule, order, ordinance, direction, by-law, resolution, or other instrument, (

a) issued, made, or established in the exercise of the legislative power, conferred by or under any statute; or (

b) for the contraven tion of which there is a penalty, fine, imprisonment, or any other measure is prescribed by or under any statute. So I think tha t points out , in pro bably better terminology than I could use, exactly what it was I was trying to indicate to the Minister this afternoon.

Not wishing to bring that argument up again, I would ask the Min ister if he could supply us with a schematic of the propos ed reorganization of the department, as well as a schematic of how the department was organized in the past, so that we can make the comparisons to see where the changes are being made and where the shifts in personnel are taking place? MR. JORGENSON: The reorganization chart has not, as yet, been finally approved by a treasury board, but as soon as that is done I'll und ertake to insure that my honourable friend has a copy of that.

There is no point in presenting it until he has it in the approved form so that he will know precisely that is the chart that will be used. MR. COWAN: Could th e Min ister give us a tentative date, and I won't hold him to it, but just when we should expect, perhaps, the reorganization to take place? A ballpark figure, if he will. MR. JORGENSON: Well, as soon as the plan receives final approval; I see no good reason why we wouldn't want to start almost immed iately.

But I cannot tell him when it will be approved by Treasury Board, given of course, the strictures imposed by the session being on, the time element that is involved. It is my intention to move in that direction as soon as we possibly can. MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: Just to pick up, Mr. Chairperson, on a number of comments that were taking place earlier this evening and this afternoon also.

The Minister indicated that there is now an information officer, or will be an information officer in place, that will be responsible for providing the public with information, with details, with educational programs. I would ask the Minister if this is the same information officer that was taken out of the department in 1978 by the previous Tory Minister responsible for Mines, Natural Resources and the Environment? MR. JORGENSON: We will be advert ising for that position. I must confess that I didn't even know that there was one that was taken out. MR. COWAN: I think, Mr.

Chairperson, the Minister got the gist of my remarks that were somewhat cynical, because at that time in the deba tes we had indicated quite strongly that we were convinced that was the wrong thing to do; that there was a need for MR. JORGENSON: Well, tha t shows you how persuasive your arguments were. MR. COWAN: The Minister says that shows us how persuasive our arguments were. Unfortunately, they 2904

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. weren't at that time and that was the reason why we went for a couple of years without an information officer, an officer that I felt had a valuable function to perform; and an officer which the Minister, at the time said, no, we don't really need, because the level of public awareness is much higher now than it was in the past and had arguments similar to that.

I'm not bitter about it, neither do I want to gloat about it, but I do want to point out that there was a position for an information officer and it has been vacant for two years under his govern ment, and that's too bad because it was necessary, and I can only say that I am pleased that they have now found that ought to be the case, and that information officer is being put back in place.

As one who would look at the sheet that the Minister was kind enough to give us at the beginning will notice, in the Environmental Control Department there was a substantial drop from the 197 9-80 adjusted vote, compared to the 1978-79, and now we're going back up in the 1980-81 requested vote, but we still haven 't reached the level of 1978-79 in staff person years; so that is another item I thought I would put on the record, that this department, even though it is an increase over last year, is not yet up to the level that it was in previous years.

And I only hop e th at the Min ister's inv olvement in this department will continue if it means that we are going to get more and more staff people to do the very necessary types of jobs, but again, we'll reserve judgement on tha t although we commend the initiative. I would ask the Minister if he can indicate if a study that was being done on acid rain, and we had ·discussed in last year's est imates, has been completed yet. Let me just give the Minister some background information on it if I can.

The previous Minister indicated that they were studying acid rain and they were studying it in this perspective: (1) to dete rmine the effect on vegetat ion; (2) to determ ine the effect on the soil; and (�) to determine the effect on some biological organisms. And he had indicated last year that was the third year of the study and was most likely the last year.

Now, in all fairness, he advised at that time that it might be completed within a year, and he made that statement on March 5th; so I believe it would be appropriate to ask if that study, which was designed - and I'm quoting the Minister from last year's estimates - which was designed to determine biological impacts of the discharge of contaminants from the plant, has been completed yet, and if the Minister can table it. MR. JORGENSON: That particular project, which was a joint project with the federal government, I think it was a th ree-year arrangement with the federal gove rnmen, which ended last year.

We renewed it again this year, so that study will be continuing. I'm not sure whether there is a report that is available for the studies that have taken place up to this point or whether they will be all inclusive. We can provide an interim report on that study if my honourable friend is interested. MR. COWAN: Yes, I would appreciate that as soon as possible.

I had wished to talk about acid rain for a bit, but I'll ask the Minister if he can provide us, without the report itself, but with some of the results of that report in regard to the acid rain problems in northern Manitoba, if he could fill us in on some of the details of what that report found? MR.

JORGENSON: It would be difficult for me to outline the terms of the information that is available up to this point, other than to say the conclusion is tha t the acid rain problem in the provi nce of Ma nitoba is not severe, largely because of the buff ering of the limest one tha t is av ailable in northern Manitoba; it acts as a neutralizer and somewhat negates the effects of acid rain in this province. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I'll have to look for my copy of the Long-range Transportation of Air Pollutants Report, because I seem to believe, or recollect, that in tha t they indicated that the Pre-Cambrian Sh ield was an area tha t was suscep tible, in many respects more susceptible than some, to the effects of acid rain; and I happen to know that we do possess some of that shield area in northern Manitoba, and I also recall looking at the maps, reviewing the maps that were provided with that report.

Although that report was directed primarily towards Ontario and east of the border, the Manitob a-Ontario border, it did extend somewhat and it did show that there were some areas that we should be concerned about in Manitoba; and I would ask the Min ister if that is not an accurate reflection of what the joint Un ited State s-Canadian report had to say was that Pre Cam bria n Shi eld areas are sometimes mor e susceptible than others, and that we indeed did have some of th ose areas, although it may no t be extensive, but we did have some of those areas in northern Manitoba. MR.

JORGENSON: I'm advised that, because of the buffering action that I mentioned earlier, we do not appear to have any appreciable rise in the levels of acid rain in this province. The problem does not appear to be getting more serious, but as I say, the studies will be continuing and we will probably have a better idea when this next series of studies are completed. I'm advised that my honourable friend is right in one connec tion , that the Pre-Cam brian Sh ield is susceptible. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I'm glad I had confirmation of that, because I couldn't find my report in the meantime, but I do recall reading that. I would just try to clarify somet hing that the Minister said. He said that the problem with acid rain is not increasing in the province of Manitoba.

It would appear to me that the problem of acid rain would be incr easing because it is incr easing worldwide but what the Minister was attempting to say was that because of the buffering action of natural limestone, while the problem is indeed increasing, he doesn't see a significant impact on a number of the lakes in the north although there will be an impact on some lakes, if I can put words in the Minister's mouth like that, I'm not certain I should try to do that though. 2905

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. MR. JORGENSON: One point in connection with the comments tha t my honourable friend has, although the levels of contamination do not appear to be increasing, I agree that it does not necessarily mean that the acid rain problem is diminishing, and with increased use of hydrocarbons as fuel that could have a very significant impact on the increased levels of acid rain in Manitoba.

I say quite frankly, we are concerned about tha t happen ing and as it appears to be going to happen, unless there is some way of reducing the amount of emissions of sulphur dioxide into the air, then we will of course have a great deal more concern. MR. COWAN: Well again, I'll attempt to clarify what I am hearing so that I am certain that we are building on a strong base here and that is that the Minister said that the contamination problem does not seem to be increasing. I would ask if indeed that is the case.

I would anticipate that the contamination problem is indeed increasing, although it may not have reached the level where it is going to be more influential than the buffering action of natura l limestone. But if it continues to increase, of course, one could expect that the buffering action of natural limestone would become less and less and that the problem would then tend to aggravate itself, and that we would be caught at a stage where there would be a sudden change because we had used up much of the buffering action of the natural limestone. MR.

JORGENSON: I am advised that the federal government has considered the problem to be significant enough that it will become one of the subjects for discussion between the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States at their next meeting. There is no question that there will be significant increases in the United States as a result of the increased use of hydrocarbons for fuel. Although we perhaps are pleased that the problem is not more serious at the present tim e in the province of Manitoba, it does not mean that we are without concern that the problem can become serious.

Our continuing studies will give us more information on whether or not there is cause for even greater concern than we currently have. MR. COWAN: I appreciate the fact that we are talking about a problem that does transmit itself across not only provi ncial bounda ries but international boundaries, but we do have a problem in Manitoba and I would just like to read from some reports if I can, and seek the Minister's comments in regards to what we find in them. This report is a report on air pollution and forest de cline near a nickel smelter. The Thompson, Manitoba, Smoke Easement Su rvey 19 72-74 by Mr.

Blauel and Mr. Hocking is part of the National Forest Research Centre efforts of the Canadian Forestry Service, Environment Canada, and the file report is October 19, 19 74. It was received by th e Environmental Protection Agency on October 21s t, 1974. If I can just read from page 13 of the report: Levels of sulphur and nickel on foliage resemble those near Sud bury, Ontario, where devastation of much of the forest is wide spread and complete. The current impacts on the forest near Thompson are mostly due to the direct absorption of pollutants by the vegetat ion.

This type of injury will intensify as emissions continue. Although toxicant levels in the soil - and now we've gone beyond acid rain and we're talking about the general problem of heavy metal contamination coupled with the problem of acid rain, to use a colloquial term, near emission sources. Although toxicant levels in the soil have not yet reached those near Sudbury, this is explainable by the strong chelating properties of surface organic matter. And the reference they make is to Whitby's study in 1974 in which levels are extremely high and increasing near Thompson.

Continued emission of large volumes of acid producing sulphur dioxide will likely lead to release of heavy metals from the surface organic matter through conversation to soluable forms av ailable to uptake by vegetat ion. And they go on at some length to explain some of the problems. But I would like to jump now to a study by the same people entit led, Progr essive He avy Metal Accumulation Associated with Forest Decline near the Nickel Smelter at Thompson, Manitoba. And it's an In formation Report No. NOR-X- 16 9 from Environment Canada, February 19 77, No rthern Forest Research Centre.

I would like to read from the discussion and conclusions in that. The forest decline around Thompson was related in our earlier report to cumulative effects of the smelter emissions. Exam inations of annual su rvey data ind icated that the level of injury has developed progressively dur ing the entire period of smelter operations, starting with initial signs recorded only two years after operations started.

They go on to say that, and I will have to apologize if I butcher some of the words because my enunciation of some of these terms is not exactly proper but it says, Pollutant-sensit ive epiphy tic lichens have disappeared from sites near the smelter and are in depau perate condition at sites up to II km. distance. It goes on to say that these were formerly abundant in the area. They go on, on page 14 to say, Pollutant accumulation in the area is stead ily increasing.

Levels of nickel in the soil surface organic matter are similar to those found near Sud bury, by Hutchinson and Whitby (19 74), where vegetative decline and erosion are well advanced. There are indications that the surface contamination at Thompson is being moved into the upper A mineral soil, although not yet being leached into the deeper zones. And that is something that we have to be very cognizant of and try to deal with very quickly.

They mention tha t cumulative copper was being found in the soil surface organic matter and they went on to say something I just learned this evening, tha t nickel and copp er acti ng together have synergistic effects and I was not aware of that. The Memb er for Rossmere asked me, what effect? Synergistic, which means that two and two is twenty to put it in the simpliest terms that I can. They go on to say, and I quote, We have confirmed the presence of one of these, and they are talking about toxicants.

They say, We have confirmed the presence of one of these: arsenic, an element known for serious effects on animals feeding near a smelter. Entry of many of these elements into the soil chemical and biological cycles initiates major site 2906

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. degrada tion, because they cannot be neutralized or removed easily. I am continuing to read from the report and it says ... The Member for Rossmere asked me if that's like two cigarettes smelling worse than one. No, it's like the Member for Burrows and the Member for St. Boniface's tobacco smoke reacting together and smelling much worse than either one alone. We have now explain synergistic. Where was I? And if the Member for Elmwood is smoking a cigar, that is what we call a toxin.

We are far enough away from the Chairperson's seat in the house that by the time the pollutant has reached us it has been diluted and dispersed sufficiently that we are below the odor threshold. It's dissipating nicely into the atmosphere, so to speak. At any rate, all those asides, aside. I'll continue with the report and I quote, The contamination already present near the smelter is sufficient to seriously inhibit plant growth if the contaminants become available to the plants. High contamination of soil with heavy metals is also like to affect the activities of microogransims.

And I am skipping around in the report now. The problem with these heavy metals is that their half life in the soil is very extensive and that it takes a long while for them to be leeched out and into a diluted enough form not to present a problem. Then we are not certain where they are going anyway, if they are not accumulating at some other end of the chain. But it says here that Soil acidity has an important bearing on mobility of heavy metals, and acidity is strongly effected by sulphur dioxide, a usual component of smelter emissions.

They then go on to tal k ab out th e persistent problems tha t others have run across in their attempts to revegetate the soils and they say that in most cases in order to do that it requires, and I quote from the report, requires novel and heroic measures such as burying the contam inated layer under several feet of clean soil. Towards the end of the report it says, The trend is clear: wherever uncontained smelter emissions have occurred, they have been associated with extensive and persistent vegetation injury and soil degrada tion.

At Thompson, and this is where we may still have a chance, it says, At Thompson, at the head of page 17 , degradation has not yet progressed very far. Soil sur face contami nation to levels resembling those th at have led to persistent problems elsewhere extends at Thompson to a distance of only 2-5 km. from the smokestack. The installation of contain ment measu res now could prevent or at least greatly retard further degradati on. And I am certain the Minister will have something to say about that.

But it says, In conc lusion, the Thompson area displays all indications of progressive forest decline and soil degrada tion thr ough cumu lative contamination with heavy metals. Elsewhere, this has always led to extensive and persistent devast ation. If emissions continue unabated, such effects can be anticipated for the Thompson area.

Before going on to another area of the north, I would just ask the Minister if he would be prepared to indicate what is being done in this regard and to make some general comments on what I believe to be some very significant statements arising out of those two reports done by the same people in a period th ree years apart. MR.

JORGENSON: Those reports tha t were presented to the study group, I believe it was the Clean Environment Commission in 1977, and that submis sion tha t was presented to the Clean Environment Commission was the basis upon which a million dollar study was launched, of which the province cost-shared. I am also informed that the International Nickel Company, as a result of that submission, is now studying ways of converting sulphur dioxide into sulphuric acid.

I am not sure just to what extent that process has progr essed but it does indicate that submission has produced some significant action and generated some concern on the part of both the government of Manitoba and the International Nickel Company. I am also informed that study and other submissions that were made enabled the Clean Environment Commission to set the levels of emission at the lnco plant in Thompson. So there has been some response, some reaction, to the submission that was made at that time by the Forestry Division of the federal government. MR.

COWAN: Is the Minister able to indicate if those orders have been complied with fully, or if there are periods of time when the emissions exceed the standard set by those orders? And I'd ask the Minister if he could also table those order, not this ev ening, I wouldn't expect it this evening, but before we get to his salary and also, perhaps a better way to phrase the question is ask him to table the numb er of times in which the levels have been exceeded? MR. JORGENSON: My advice is that, by and large, the orders have been adhered to; there perhaps have been one or two occasions when they have exceeded that.

I'm advised that if it reaches the stage where th ose emission orders are exceeded, th en the lnternation Nickel Company would cut back on their emissions. With respect to providing my honourable friend with the order, that can be easily done, we'll made them available to him. MR. COWAN: While on that subject, I'd asked the Minister the other day for a number of documents; I just ask him if those documents are ready for dis trib ution? This was on the first day of his Estimates, I had indicated that we would appreciate having them if possible. MR.

JORGENSON: Oh yes, they're available, we'll deal with them one at a time. That information will be made available, but our legal advice has been that they should be provided to the CTC inquiry first. And that also applies to the documentation between CNR and the department; and Dow Chemical and the department. I might add that we have gone through the files and we are unable to find any documentation, so my honourable friend may wait in vain for correspondence of this.

At that particular time, I think my honourable friend will be well aware that there was no time to be writing letters; if there was conversation or there was communication it was almost invariably by telephone. 2907

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. Yes, the third one, which deals with the question of environmental accidents being reported to me, as Minister, on a monthly basis. I have one problem with that particular request and I'm trying to figure out a way that I can provide my honourable friend with th at information without violating a fairly standard practice; and that is that interdepartmental documents, and this, my friend must und erstand, is a report to the Minister. I will certainly see if I can find some way of providing him with that information without sett ing a precedent that would be very difficult to reverse.

That has been a problem for some nu mber of years and I recall on several occasions, even when I was in opposition, that I defended that particular principle on the part of the Minister, not wanting to table documents that were considered departmental by nature. I have no reason to change my mind on that, but the information, in my view, is innocuous enough that I will endeavour to find some way of doing it without breaking that principle. MR. COWAN: Mr.

Chairperson, I would not ask the Minister to break a long-standing principle; I'm just trying to figure out how I got it last year, whether it was through official or unofficial sources? MR. JORGENSON: You probably got it through unofficial services. Now that has been known to happen. I don't think that my honourable friend got it through my office; it must have been before I assumed responsibility, but again, I wouldn't want to start that. MR. COWAN: I'll have to check back on that, Mr.

Chairperson, and see if I brought it up on last year's Estimates; I honestly don't know remember how it got in my file, but I know it's in my file and I ... MR. JORGENSON: I know how certain things got into my file when I was in opposition, so . . . MR. COWAN: I agree with the Minister that the material in it is definitely innocuous, I mean it is the type of material that should be public information. As a matter of fact, it is a material that is pub lic information in . . . MR. JORGENSON: At the end of the year. MR.

COWAN: . at an end of a year report and I will just have to look back and see and I'll come back to this matter, which I'll attempt to do, perhaps, when one of my colleagues take over. But I'd ask the Min ister, on the request for transm ittal of documentation in regard to the MacGregor spill, on what grounds - and I'm not a lawyer so I'm seeking informtion here, although there is a lawyer on this side that can help me - but on what grounds have they been advised not to provide us with information that is going to become public in a matter of days anyway?

I would anticipate that what's presented to the commission becomes public. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, our legal advice suggested that we wouldn't want to appear to be circumventing a semi-judicial inquiry and that was the judgement of the law officers of the Crown that it would be advisable to present that information to the inquiry first. Now I'm not a lawyer either so I simply have to take the advice of legal council.

My Deputy advises me that one other reason is that Dow Chemical undoub tedly have their own readings and there is a possibility that they may be different, or in conflict with readings that we've taken and if there is such a conflict it would best appear before the commission to straighten out, rather than have that information provided here. I regret that I have to decline my honourable friend's suggestion. I might say also, with respect to the tabling of those monthly reports, those report, those accident reports, I frankly can't think of any good reason why they have to come to me, as a Minister.

I'm thinking very seriously of having those reports just simply made public on a monthly basis, rather than as a ministerial document. MR. COWAN: Thank you. I'd ask the Minister to do that retroactively if he does. MR. JORGENSON: Well, if I do, yes, I'll see that my honourable friend gets that information. MR. COWAN: Mr. Chairperson, on the other issue, I suddenly feel somewhat insignificant.

It's not a feeling that I'm used to, but the fact is that the Minister is saying that he's not going to release the information to a member of the opposition who has requested it because he wants first to release it to the inquiry; and the legal advice is that is the proper course of action. And I, just for the life of me, can't fathom why we shouldn't have it before us during the course of these Estimates? This is a proper place to discuss this issue and we cannot discuss it unless we - well, we can discuss it but we cannot discuss it as competently without the information as we could with the full information.

And I would not ask the Minister for the reports of Dow Chemical's monitoring because I would hope that the provincial department's monitoring is as accurate, if not more accurate, and quite frankly, my own bias would tend to lead me to believe the provincial department's monitoring over anyone else's monitoring, knowing that they have a very competent laboratory and very good staff in this regard and that they should not have any vested interest in making certain that the levels appear either high or low.

So I would tend to believe theirs if there was a contradicti on, and ther efore, I didn't even ask for any other readings. So I cannot see what possible problem there would be there because no one that I know of, outside of the inquiry, is asking for Dow's read ings; so it'll be up to the inquiry to make the argument that thos e readings are contradictory.

And, in fact, many of those readings have been made public and, in fact, I have a document from the Minister's department that was sent to me, through very legitimate means, that was promised publicly, which was a map of the readings in the snow; and the Minister was very quick to indicate what certain readings were in the Legislature and there were others who were very qu ick to indicate what certain readings were in the media. And now when I ask for the readings in this committee, which would be an appropriate place to follow through on the discussion, I can't get the 2908

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. readings. And yet we knew there was an inquiry, even when we were making comments in the Legislature.

The Minister was telling us what readings were and he knew at that time there was going to be an inquiry.I don't want to get sidetracked on this issue, but I just have to protest in the strongest terms the fact that we are not being given that informa tion, whic h we have requested in a responsible way, and which I believe will enable Her Majesty's loyal opposition to better unde rstand the problems that were occurring at the time; and to better provide advice to the Mi nister, which the Minister has assured me he is welcoming and does, from time to time, take into consideration to one extent or another; and therefore, I would, without wanting to get embroiled in an argument about it, ask the Minister to reconsider, ask the Minister to go back for a new legal opinion in the hopes that our arguments have been persuasive enough.

The Member for Rossmere says that he is going to give him an argument that he believes will be persuasive, that he can carry on to his legal counsel. While he is doing that, Mr. Chairperson, I would endeavour to go back to my office very briefly and try to come back with the monthly reports to see exactly what format they are transmit ted in. So I would hope that the Member for Rossmere . . . MR. JORGENSON: Before my .honourable friend leaves, I just want to commend him, as he has commended me, for his powers of anticipation when he suggested that I should reconsider and go back for another legal opinion.

That's precisely what I was going to advise him that I was going to do. I commend him for his powers of persuasion and assure him that it's not fallen on deaf ears; his argument is, in my opinion, a reasonably good one and I will undertake to go back and see if I can't get a third opinion. If I can get two out of three; let me put it this way, if two out of th ree still goes against my honourable friend, then I'll try for th ree out of five. MR. COWAN: I just have to inform the Minister that we're with him all the way on this one. MR.

SCHROEDER: At any rate, these reports, it would seem to me, can be distinguished from reports which are ordinarily provi ded by departmental perso nn el to a Min ister, reports which provide opinions, which are subjective.

When you are dealing with a report which provides a reading, an ob jective reading of a circumstance, you're not providing an opinion to the Minister, you're not putting something out which in that sense is taking something of yourself, as an officer of the Crown, and putting it out to the Minister.I believe that, as well, when you deal with accident reports, I can under stand the Minister being reticent about releasing reports which have opinions of officers of the Crown dealing with the accident itself, suggesting ways in which it could have been preven ted, ways in which it could have been remedied, that sort of thing.

But if the request is simply one of how many have been reported; then that is not something that is a subjective matter, it's not an area where there would be any logical reason why that shouldn't be made public. And when we talk about specific reports on this particular accident at MacGregor and say that we can't deal with the information gathered by the provincial department, because of the fact that there happens to be an enquiry going on at the same time, I would respectfully suggest that that legal advice is rather cons ervative.

Sur ely, for instance, if that hearing wasn't going to be held for several months, or if we weren't sure right now whether there was going to be a heari ng, tha t very same lawyer wouldn't have said, no, during the Environmental Department Estima tes we can't talk about tha t because maybe something's going to happen, or it will happen several months from now. What we're now hearing in terms of advice from that law officer is that this legislative commit tee is to take a back seat to a commission at a time . . . MR. JORGENSON: I wonder if I may interrupt my honourable friend.

He's talking about two different thing. On the one hand, he's talking about the accident reports that come to me, personally. That presents a different argument than the other one that he's talking about, the readings at the accident site. With respect to the accident reports that come to my on a monthly basis, I can tell my honourable friend that they do contain some subjective opinions that if they are made public perhaps would not contain. They're for my information so I can draw conclusions.

Now, I am quite prepared to submit to my honourable friend the straightforward accident report without the su bjective opinio ns tha t are contained therein. That poses no problem to me at all, and I will, very happily, reword the submission that I get and eliminate those subjective views and give him the information regarding the details of a spill or an accident; that poses no problem.

And what I suggested earlier is that I wouldn't object at all to making those reports public if they just contained the information regarding the details of a spill or an accident; that does not cause me any great hardship or problem, I think they should be made public, in any case. MR. SCHROEDER: I guess we can agree on that. MR. JORGENSON: We can agree on that one; the other one poses a di fferent problem, if my honourable friend wants to continue with his line of argument on that other subject, that's all right. MR.

SCHROEDER: Thank you, yes, I would agree with the Minister on that first area, and appreciate his comments. Certainly if he was to take any subjective material out of those reports and provide the rest of it to us, it would seem to me that's all we're entitled to. Dealing with the MacGregor spill - and please correct me if I'm wrong - my unde rstanding is that there's some objective data which was gathered at the scene which my colleague from Churchill has requested. That objective data, it seems to me, can in no way compromise th ose hearings which are currently going on with respect to the spill.

In fact, I would assume that Dow Chemical has all of thos e figures right now. Is that not correct? MR. JORGENSON: Our figures? 2909

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. MR. SCHROEDER: Your figures. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, they have them. MR. SCHROEDER: Well, if Dow Chemical has all of the figures, then it would seem to me that it doesn't make any sense whatsoever, in this entire world, that this legislative committee should not receive those figures. MR. JORGENSON: Well, Mr. Chairman, perhaps we could hopefully conclude this by saying that I'm more impressed with the arguments that I've heard here tonight than I am with the legal advice that I've been gett ing, although I can't disregard that legal advice.

I am going to take this back again and get another opinion on it, and hopefully we can arrive at some satisfactory conclusion on it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: Yes, Mr. Chairperson.

I just want to ensure that the Minister, when we are talking about the monthly report, that we were talking about, indeed, the same report and it would be a report un der th e Envir onm ental Control Br anch, Environmental Accident Summ ary, Janu ary 19 78, February 1978, that is what the Minister considers to be an internal document, and I would hope, if that is the case, that he would reconsider and apply that retroactively, because ... MR.

JORGENSON: Well, as I ind icated to the Member for Rossmere earlier, from time to time those reports contain some subjective observat ions that are intended for the Minister. If my honourable friend is anxious to get the simple details of an accident I will most certainly make them available, and we can have that done. Just for this year, you want them? MR. COWAN: No, I would ask for - well, let me see what mine goes up to, December 26, 1978 - so I would ask for 1979. MR. JORGENSON: Well, 1979, you have it in the annual report. MR. COWAN: No, I do not believe so. I believe in 1979 that we have an overall

summary where you say there were so many accidents of a specific nature;

whereas what I am asking for is details of each specific accident. I don't particularly care - well, I do care what the recommendations that were made to the Minister are, but I believe he is justified in saying that he may wish to not include those on there. I didn't find anything compromising in what I found, but if the Minister believes there could be, then I would prefer to have the general details rather than make an argument over the fact that I need that recommendation. MR. JORGENSON: Then, under those conditions, I will see that you get that information. MR. COWAN: Yes.

I would just like to then go back to what we were talking about before, and that was Thompson.

The Minister ind icates that these orders that came about in 19 77 came about as a result of this particular study that was done in regard to progressive heavy metal accumulation in 1974 and 1977, and that the orders had been, by and large, complied with, although there has been, from time to time, excessive emissions released at which point lnco cuts back their production which would result in the corre sponding red uction in the levels of emissions; and I would ask for further details on that and hope that they will be forthcoming.

I would ask the Minister who does the monitoring in regard to the levels that are being emitted by the plant? MR. JORGENSON: Is my honourable friend asking tor a particular name, or . . . ? MR. COWAN: No. Whether it's lnco or whether it's the ... MR. JORGENSON: It's the department. MR. COWAN: then would like to dir ect the Min ister's att ention to a report whic h is from Environment Science and Technology, December, 19 79, incorpor ated by the American Chem ical So ciety, entitled Atmospheric Fallout in the Vicinity of a Base Metal Sm elter at Flin Flon, Ma nitoba, Canada.

It's done by William Franz and Gordon McFarlane and And rew Lutz from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Freshwater Ins titut e in Winnipeg. And again, I would just like to speak to the conclusion very briefly, and it says, we have documented here, by two methods, the deposition of metals in atmospheric fallout in the vicinity of a base metal smelter.

Comparison of the figures with those for other areas indicates that the Flin Flon smelter is a significant, and I un derscore that, that's my und erscoring, a significant source of airborne zinc, cadmium, lead, arsenic, copper, and possibly S04 to as much as 250,000 sq uare ki lometres of th e environment in the vicinity of the smelter. That was the conclusions. And then I refer to another report which comes from the Department of Mines, Natural Resources and Environment, entitled Environmental Report, Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company Limited, Flin Flon, Manitoba, and it's File No. 1095.2.

And the report itself is not da ted that I can see, but the letter from Larry Strachan, is dated November 27, 1979, and that's a letter to Mr. Stewart, the Executive Secretary of the Clean Environment Commission, and I would just like to read a couple of excerpts from that. One is the estimated emission rates from th e superstack at Flin Flon, the 825 foot stack.

Before continuing on with the data from the report, I might just comment on the concept of superstacks, in that a numb er of years ago they seemed to be the method that was being anticipated as being a ways and means of dealing with some very seri ous pollutant problems; and a lot of money, time, engine ering effort and hope, went into the superstack concept; a concept that suggested that you can, in fact, dilute and disperse; that you don't have to capture and contain, and capturing and containing being the more expensive of the two methods, for the most part was looked over for the less expensive method of superstacking, which does 2910

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. not appear to have fully alleviated the problem, as a matter of fact, it might have exacerbated the problem in certain areas. But we find, and I'm not a technician, I'm not an expert in this area, so I'll rely upon your experts in the area. But we find that the sulphur dioxide average emission rate in pounds for a 24-hour day was - and will someone correct me if I'm wrong, please - 1, 300,000 pounds. What I have is a figure of 1. 3 to 10 to the 6th power. Okay. That that was the average emission rate of pounds over a 24-hour day.

An interesting sidelight that there was 2,970 pounds of lead emitted into the air also on a 24-hour day, which is over a million pounds a year. And these are readings from Environment Canada, or at least the sulfur dioxide readings were from Environment Canada and the lead readings were from the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company. What we see is a substantial rate of emissions.

It said that, and this must be the study that the Mini ster is referring to: A current Federal-Provincial Vegetation and Soil Survey ongoing in the Flin Flon areas has indicated that: -an inverse gradient of zinc, copper, and other heavy metal accumulations in soil and vegetation occurs distally from the smelter site; -high accumulations (of heavy metals) were found on soil surface and vegetation targets to some 10 Km distance from the smelter; -high levels of heavy metal contaminants were found in the mineral soil at 5 Km and closer distances; -the native vegetation within most of the area 5 Km from the smelter had suffered severe deterioration; -lichen and bryophyte depletions occur to 10 Km distance; and -many of the symptoms displayed by the remaining forest vegetation within these areas were consistent with those caused by sulphur dioxide and heavy metal contaminant stress.

Ambient air monitoring for sulphur dioxide in Flin Flon has been conducted by the company and the Environmental Control Branch for several years. What that would indicate to the concerned person is that we do have a major problem in the Flin Flon area with emissions and as we had a major problem in the Thompson area, and still do have a major problem; let us not suggest that by any means we have alleviated the problem in Thompson because we have imposed orders, that is not the case.

We have tried to deal with it and that is sometimes the best that we can do on a short term basis, but we have not eliminated the problem. The fact is that we have a significant problem in Flin Flon and why 1 bring this forward is, I have received communic ations that have been copied to myself and directed to Mr. Stewart of the Clean Environment Commission addressing itself to this problem and they are from Dallas Mymko, who is the representative for the Unit ed Steel Workers of America in Flin Flon. I would just like to quote very briefly from that letter.

They have reviewed this report and, With figures like S02 emissions of 1, 300,000 pounds per day in 1977, why is stack sampling done only once a year. Now 1 am not certain that is the case, but 1 would ask the Minister if that is the case, and if so, why? Why let HBM&S, or Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting, wait until 1981 to produce a report on S02 emissions for converter aisles and anode casting roof monitors.

He goes on to say they are a little concerned about the particulate matter emissions, he talks about them, and he says, At present there is no effort being made to control particulate matter emissions from roof monitors, anode casting stack, or zinc casting furnaces. No effort is being made to control S02 emissions, thus when the S02 enters the atmosphere, S02 and H2S04 process still takes place and has a dramatic effect of its own - acid rain. The explanation of the difference in HBM&S and Environmental Control Branch Stations - example; he wants to know why there is a difference in the readings.

He says that it is not very clear to me at all, and the Saskatchewan Air Quality Standard for sulfur dioxide (0.17 ppm - one hour average) has been exceeded a total of 340 times in Creighton, Saskatchewan. This makes me shiver as, according to my

interpretation of the report, the further you get from the smelter site, the lower the metal pollutant concentrate is. It talks about the effect that it is having on Flin Flon. He talks about the super-stacks concept and is quite concerned, and he asks, Is our problem becoming someone else's? He goes on, On page 11 the report admits the hazards of arsenic, mercury and lead; it admits emissions of these metals from the complex, however, the impact on the environment of the Ain Flon area is not well documented.

Then it closes with the following statement: Due to these comments which I have drafted as quickly as possible to comply with your request, and without expert knowledge, I would request that you give serious consideration to holding a hearing in Flin Flon before renewing the licence for HBM&S stack. By so doing we would be able to prepare a brief with some expert assistance.

I think what we are seeing here is a trend that the Minis ter is well aware of, and that is that the workers, and I am very pleased to see this happen, are beginning to become concerned - I shouldn't say beginning - are showing increased concern for the environment outside the workplace as well as the environment within the workplace, because they know that their families and themselves must live and play in that environment.

In the north that is very significant, because the people rely so heavily on the outdoors for recreational pursuits because they don't have all the recreational pursuits that city people have. So the lakes, while not more important to northerners than southerners, are perceived as being more important because that is one of their primary ways of recreation. They want very desperately to protect that.

I know that it a fact, when there were hearings called in regard to Ruttan Mine last summer, I believe, I know the Steelworkers' Local 81 44, a sister Local of my own, made a presentation in regards to that, and they were also concerned about the quality of the lakes in the area and also concerned about, not only the effect it would have on their recreational pursuits, but they expressed a concern over the effect that it would have on the traditional lifestyles in the area, re fishing and trapping, if the pollution was allowed to continue unabated.

They are taking a very definite concern and trying to play a very active role in this. 291 1

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. I would ask the Minister if he can addr ess himself to some of the questions that I have relayed to him thr ough this meet ing in regards to (1) what is happening to monitor environmental quality in Flin Flon, and (2) why let HB M&S wait until 198 1 to produce a report on S02 emissions for the converter aisles and anode casting roof monitors, if that is indeed the case, if he can confirm it and addr ess some remarks to that , and also in regard to a hearing in Flin Flon. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. MR. JORGENSON: Mr.

Chairman, to deal with my honourable friend's last question first, the hearing has been scheduled for May 21s t of this year, so anyone who wishes to can make submissions before that hearing, and perhaps it is the proper place to be dir ecting qu estions that anyone may have with respect to HBM&S air emissions. With respect to the question that he posed about monitoring that stack once a year, and as he knows and as he has indicated, it is a fairly high stack and it is not easy to get somebody to climb up that stack in the middle of the winter when the wind is blowing.

He is quite right when he says that the emissions are monitor ed only once a year because of the very difficulty of getting someone to do the monitoring. However, the ambient air around there is mon itored on a regular basis, where somebody can get his feet on terra firma, and the more firma the less terra, so that there is an effort to continue monitoring as best we can. MR. COWAN: I ho pe the Mini ster has no t challenged me to a pun contest because I don't do well at them, but I have my colleagues here, who assure me that they will go one on one.

I am pleased to hear the hearing is May 21s t and I am certain that the steelworkers, if I can speak for them, because they indicated that they do want to present a brief or at least participate in some way at that hearing, will be there and will play a vital part, I hope, in the proceedings. Because as the Minister said, he is enthusiastic about gett ing the public to play a more active role in dealing with the problems and dev eloping solutions for problems.

I have to indicate you wouldn't get me up there in the middle of the winter on a 825 or 850 foot stack; you wouldn't get me up there in the middle of the summer. I would not want to volunteer to be the one to climb the stack in the winter, but I am not certain that that is as viable a reason as one can up with, for the fact that it is only monitored once a year; perhaps monitoring could take place once in the spring and once in the fall. I am not even certain that it is necessary.

I am not certain, because I am not an expert in the area, what wou ld be served by monitoring more than once a year, but I am certain of the fact that someone won't climb the stack in the winter would not be enough of a reason not to monitor, if monitoring was necessary. I know HBM&S asks its workers to do lots of things in the winter that they don't want to do, and yet they do, although I would reserve the right to carry forth the grievance of that individual under The Workplace, Safety and Health Act as to working under unsafe conditions, if one were to attempt to force such an individual to do that.

The fact is that we do have a problem in Flin Flon, according to this report, which is a recent report, and the point about this report is that it says that the smelter is a significant source for these different heavy metal contaminants and S04 to as much as 250,000 square kilometers of the environment in the vicinity of the smelter.

We are talking about a fairly large area in regards to environmental abuse, and I would hope that the hearing will address itself to that, because we know now from the Environmental Control Branch data that the Manitoba air quality objectives for sulfur dioxide are being exceeded on a fairly, perhaps regular is too strong a word, but on, it looks to be th e least consis tent man ner. The maximum acceptable level, which is 900 micrograms per cubic meter for a one hour average , or parts per millions, so that is being exceeded in 1979, for an example. We are only talking about January to July 19th incl usive.

At the town hall site in Flin Flon, it was exceeded 11 times in regard to the one hour average and it was exceeded once in regard to the 24 hour average, but the fact is that in all 1978 it was only exceeded 12 times for the one hour average and it was not exceeded for the 24 hour average. In 1977, it was five times for the one hour and none for the 24 hour; in 1976 it was five and 15. The figures are somewhat similar for the Pub lic Works yard in Flin Flon, that it is being exceeded on a one hour average on a consistent basis.

I think what is more alarming is we see that in Creighton, that the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company data shows that the number of times the emissions are exceedings the objectives. In 1979 - we are using January to September inclusive figures now - it was 11 also, and none on a 24 hour basis. At Phantom Lake we saw 16 on a one hour basis. I hope I am not misinterpreting the data, but the fact is that there seems to be a fair amount of excessive emissions.

They seem to be increasing and not decreasing when you compare them to a 1974 figure, so the problem is getting worse and the problem does not appear to be getting bett er. As we all know, this sort of contamination cannot be allowed to continue without having the same type of effects that we have seen at longer - I shouldn't say longer, because I imagine the Flin Flon smelter has been in production as long as Sudbur y, if not longer - but we see it other areas where production of this nature occurs.

I would ask the Min ister if the y are doing any monitoring of the environmental quality around the site, and if they have been doing so for a period of time so that comparisons can be made. MR. CHAIRMAN: Would the member repeat . . . MR. COW AN: We were doing the monitoring around lnco in Flin Flon. I'm sorry, we're doing ambient air in Flin Flon. MR. JORGENSON: Yes, we do ambient air monitoring around the stacks. MR. COWAN: I would addr ess my question then specifically to the concerns of the steel workers, and that is, when they ask, I wonder what effect the 2912

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. emission would have on our plant and animal life, in our city and surrounding areas, not to mention the effect on the people who live and have lived in the Flin Flon area for the past 50 years. So what they are asking the government to do and the Minister to do, I believe, is to document the impact on the environ ment in th e Flin Flon area, of this contamination. Is there documentation of that sort, as to vege tation, soil and biological organisms being affected by the pollution? MR.

JORGENSON: Yes, I am advised that the results of the studies up to this point are ava ilable, but the studies are continuing. I'm advised that the report my honourable friend was reading from is the report. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. I would have to go over this report once again, to determine if there is any mention of what effect is being had on the plant life and on the animal life in the area. Does the Minister know if that is included?

I do find one part, excuse me, if I can continue, it says: The effects of sulpher dioxide and heavy metals on humans, plants, animals, soils, water, materials, is well documented. It talks about the literature as background information, that these pollutants can have an adverse effect on humans and animals, can damage and kill plants and oth�r vegetation, can acidify soils and water and can act as a corrosive agent on materials. It says it's well documented throughout North America and other countries. There are two basic similarities in these documentations: 1) The emissions of sulpher dioxide and heavy metal

part iculant matter; and 2) The effect is th e degradation of surrounding environment. But they then mention some of the veget ation and soil survey recommendations or conclusions that they have drawn; they don't mention anything about biological organisms. I would ask the Minister if there has been any study done to that and if he can provide us with more detailed background informtion as to how these conclusions that are on page 8 of the study were drawn. MR. JORGENSON: They were done by our Environmental Research and Development Branch, and they were presented to the Clean Environment Commission.

So that would be a matter of public record if the steel workers would write to them. MRI COWAN: Okay, I would hope that that May 21s t hearing will take place, and that everyone who does express a concern and can make it there has ample opportunity to do so; I'm certain they will, because I know the hearings are fairly effectivly and efficiently put together. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a) - The Memb er for Churchill. MR. COWAN: would just like to, by way of conclusion, say that I don't agree with the Minister; that acid rain is not a problem in northern Manitoba.

I believe it is becoming more and more of a problem and I believe that, while it may not be as significant toda y as it will be five or ten years from now, the time to stop it, or the time to attempt to prevent it from proceeding and getting worse is now and that we must make every effort by regulation, if I may, to ensure that the sources are curtailed from further pollution, so that we do not see the effect on our lakes in no rthern Ma nitoba th at, say, perhaps Sweden has seen.

And in all fairness to the Minister, I realize that we have to contain the pollution sources here, but this is a long-range transportation of pollutants problem in that we have to support our federal government, and I believe the United States government, in their efforts to come up with a solution to this problem, because it is going to become worse if we rely mor e on burning hydrocarbons for energy sources and, at the same time, don't implement some fairly extensive te chnology tha t will prevent the sulpher from escaping into the air.

I have noted the press releases that have come, not only from the Department of Mines but also from lnco, saying that they are trying to develop a process now, in Thompson, Manitoba, that will deal with that problem and th at, I believe, tha t they have comm itted th emselves already to some major funding, and I wish th em luck. I am again commending their actions, although I believe them to be a bit late. I believe that when one does go into the production of a smelter end produc ts, that one should, right from the begi nning, take into consideration the impact on th e environment that they are going to have.

I believe that the only reason they are doing it now and have not done it before - and this is a personal belief - is that it is now that public pressure has been brought to bear to such an extent, to convince them that they must do so, or suffer greatly in the media and also in the public's mind. I think that's a historical fact.

I know when they first opened up the smelter in Copper Cliff that they used to smelt right out in the open, in pits I believe, and that part of their process was that - I'm not certain of all the details - and that they've totally devastated an area around there, because of that and that was unnecessary at that age and day. One cannot say that the technology for other ways of dealing with the problem were not available; one can only say that seemed, at that time, to be a less expensive way than would be afforded to them if they developed extensive technology.

So I am pleased to see that the public impression of this problem is increasing. I received a number of letters from grade nine students in Leaf Rapids, as a result of some documentaries that were on T.V. about the acid rain problem in Manitoba, and I take great delight in reading them. As I was going down to get my files, I grabbed it and put it down to grab a cup of coffee and I didn't have a chance to bring some of the letters down to read to the Minister, because I think they provide us with a great insight.

I know the Member for Logan indicated that he was pleased to see that the children were be ginning to become aware of the problems and I know the Minister would have been pleased, and perhaps I'll have another opportunity to bring some of those to show him, if not to put on the record, because . . . MR. JORGENSON: Ho w many wou ld my honou rable friend like us to bring from th e department? 2913

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. MR. COWAN: I would like to see them. The Minister has asked that, I think, in all sincerity and I'll take him up on it; we'll trade letters. Because I know, from reading those letters, that I developed a new insight and not a greatly different perception but a bit of a different perception.

I realized that there were many people who were concerned because those children are somethimes expressing not only their own concerns but their parents and their neighbours concerns, and that gave me a good feeling to know that the awareness of the problem had extended to that great degree throughout the society, and with that awareness will come the solution, because when people realize tha t the problems are of a significant nature they will begin to demand that action be taken.

I think it was the Minister of the Environment for the federal government that said that there is a change in the public mood out there and he was speaking specifically to acid rain. He said, two or three years ago we couldn't have proceeded as quickly and as forcefully as we are now, because the public would not have allowed us; they would have believed the arguments that we would have imposed hardships on the corporations. And now they don't accept those arguments; they believe that if we don't do that, we're imposing hardships on our environment.

And so there is a dramatic change, I agree with the federal Minister, although I don't agree on all things with the federal Minister. As a matter of fact, I disagree probably more than I do agree, but on that one I do sense that change also. There are a number of other areas which I believe we should go through in this and I think we've had a very good dis cus sion tonight. I would ask the Minister if he wants to continue on and open up another area or if he would consider the committee adjourning and beginning tomorr ow afresh, on a new area? I have to mention . . . MR.

JORGENSON: I wonder if my honourable friend would agree, just so that I can satisfy myself that we've made some progress, agree to passing (

a) and (b). Anything that he wants to say, I presume can be covered under Item (c). (Agreed) Then we can adjourn. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)(l)- pass; 5.(a)(2)-pass; 5.(b)(1)- pass; 5.(b)(2)- pass. The Member for Dauphin. MR. JIM. GALBRAITH: committee rise. Mr. Chairman, I move MR. CHAIRMAN: There is a motion that committee rise. MR. JORGENSON: We assume that (

a) and (

b) are passed. MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. COWAN: I would, if I can, just ask the Minister if he can provide us with the staff ... Well, I think we have the staff man years on that already. I would also, if I can, just clarify a situation; I'm not certain whether we'll be in committee tomorrow. We may well be, but the fact is that I have to be in Flin Flon on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday and I wanted to make certain that arrangements were made to have another estimates come forward at that time, so as not to preclude participation of the critic in the discussion of the rest of the Environment estimates. MR.

JORGENSON: I presume you've discussed this with the House Leader. MR. GALBRAITH: I believe that our House Leader has discussed it with your House Leader, yes. Okay, I'll check. MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee rise. SUPPLY -HEAL TH MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Albert Driedger (Emerson): Committee come to order. I would like to refer members of the commit tee to Resolution 77, Item (g)(1) - the Member for St. Boniface. MR. LAURENT L. DESJARDINS: I hav en't too long to speak.

I have a few thi ngs I want to finish explaining to my honourable friend from Rock Lake, and the Minister has gone to get some of the material that he needs, so during this time, Mr. Chairman, I think that before the dinner hour the Min ister had talked about, again, repeated, the question of confrontation. I think I made a pretty good case, if he was listening, to show him that there wasn't any confrontation.

I was talking about the MMA and I said that the thing that started the whole battle was that they wanted to contract out, and contract out meant it was the medical people in the field who were representing the medical doctors working for the department, and they wanted a clause in the agreement that the government could not hire anybody unless you went through and had the approval of the MMA.

I think that anybody here will recognize that this is going a little too far, and it's funny, it was such an important thing then but I'v e never noticed that they try to get that; I'm sure that no government in Canada would have that in a clause where somebody in the private field could dictate to a government who they will hire. So that was the main thing, Mr. Chairman. As far as the dental profession, and I'm going back to the Denticare program, there was a lot of negotiat ion. Finally, we said, there will some given. And I started tha t before di nner.

There was a question of recognizing the dental nurses, which as I said, they said that one wouldn't be a problem, and we said, well, at your last meeting, there was a vote that said that it wouldn't be recognized and he said, the president told me at the time that could be changed, that's not a problem. Secondly, that on the initial visit, it would be sessional pay that they would get, and after that, referrals and so on, of course it would be fee for service. That was something they didn't like, but that is what they offered in their plan.

That is what they are getting paid now, so much per student, so much for anybody that's eligible. And the third one, and a very important one as far as we're concerned, the work had to be done in the schools. 2914

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. Mr. Chairman, nobody is criticizing from this side of the House, I haven't heard one single person criticize the work of the dentists. We recognize the work of today's dentists, we're very happy. And as I said, in fairness, in justice, nobody criticized from that side, I haven't heard anybody criticize, nor the dentists criticize the work of the dental nurses in their sphere, in their area of expertise. So the thing is, the Member for Rock Lake says that we have criticized, talked about doctrinaire. Well, if anybody was doctrinaire, it is the government that was doctrinaire.

You associate that, and you say, oh those doctrinaire socialists, but doctrinaire because their mind was made up, as I said, it was a sell-out to the dentis ts who wanted the control. And that is normal. At first when there was only the profession of doctors, they wanted the control. They controlled the nurses. And when you get a little stronger, you want to control somebody else. You're so afraid, and it's going to be the end of the world if you don't keep the control.

The nurses themselves, who now are stronger, will not accept to be controlled by the medical profession, they want to stand on their own two feet, but they, in turn, wanted to control the LPN. That was one thing, they wanted to do away with the LPN, and I think that there is a role for these people, too. Anyway, going back to the Denticare program, if the government feels this is what we want, of course we can argue back and forth. The only thing that I am criticizing is the way that it was done.

You had a very good program, a program tha t was prov en, a program that was just getting started nicely, and the decision was made that it would be turned over to the dentists. You call it co-opera tion. The Minister read the riot act, and he said, you have to hire those dental nurses. Now, these dental nurses, sure, some of them are hired, but how many in the plan? Some of them, in doctors' offices, as technicians, and I don't think this is what they wanted. Then the Minister said, I deplore the fact that there is no nu rses here.

That is what got me, and this is the point that I don't like; this is what I call hypocrisy. It is obvious to anybody that has followed the deba te and anyb ody tha t has seen the action of the government that the government and the dental profession are just marking time until the dental nurses have disappeared and are out of their way.

What we say, and I said it last year and I'll say it again, mark my words, this study, I'm not too impressed by that, because the decision was made before, and then you are taking part of the program that is being scuttled and you are comparing it against one that is getting all the chances. And what kind of comparisons are we doing? We're going to study that report, we haven't had time now before this debate, but it will be studied.

But what I'm interested in is to compare, in a few years, to compare not the true programs, one is bei ng wound up, on e is being destroyed , but compare this kind of program, and mostly utilization, not the work. I'd be the last one to say that I'm not satisfied with the work of the dentists. I'v e never said tha t and I won't say it. I'm talking about the utilization in the cost. You can't tell me, Mr . Chairman, that it's going to be the same cost, that you're going to have a situation where you are going to have professionals, and look at the fees, compare the fees, and why would they work?

You know, this is a government that will give them fee for service, and look at the fees that they're having now. They've gone up again, but on this, they are saying, we'll do this for a few years. And compare that to a dental nurse -(I nterjec tion)- no, there's nothing wrong with that, but compare that to ·the work being done in that you're paying a dental nurse for a lot of the work, and you tell me which one is going to be more expensive? -(I nterjection)- Who's guarant eed 16 grand? MR. BLAKE: The dental nurses. MR. DESJARDINS: The heck the are. I don't know of any nurse that was getting 16 grand. MR.

BLAKE: Fourteen? MR. DESJARDINS: Well, now you're goin g to guess. I'm not going to make a guess. There's nothing wrong with that; I hope they are getting 16 grand. MR. BLAKE: You raised their expectat ions. MR. DESJARDINS: We raised their expect ations MR. CHAIRMAN, Abe Kovnats (Radisson): Order please. The honourable member's time is up. The Honourable Member for Minnedosa. MR. BLAKE: Just on a point of clarification, I just want to clarify, my understan ding is that dental nurses were guaranteed 14 ,000 when they completed a two-year course, and this was creating some of the problems.

Some of them maybe don't have full employment, that maybe the dentists aren't prepared to pay that kind of money because that's pretty good money for someone with really not too many years in the field and experience, and that may be where some of the problems are coming in. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, no this is not where the problem is coming, with the work that they were doing and I am not going to take a guess, I don't know. They were guaranteed a job; I don't remember that they were guaranteed a set salary; that would have to be checked.

But of course if they are going to be used as dental technicians they shouldn't earn 14 ,000.00. But it wasn't us. We never told them that they worked for dental technicians. Look at the trouble we're having with nurses now. So we educated these people at our costs and costs to the government and we started the program. Now they are not needed any more but they are in a way. Oh yes, they are in a way in a partisan, in a political; the politcal situation was, what are you going to do? They were educated by the people of Manitoba and you're going to turn them out.

The Minister said those that gradua te they will stay as dental nurses, and they well get the same salary no matter what they do. But then the others, we don't guarantee them anything and then there is no more going. That's not the problem at all. Of course we trained them to do work in a program and if you say that's getting their expectation, it's the same thing as when you train a doctor, as when you train anybody, of 2915

Thursday, 24 April, 1980. course. -(I nterjection)- Well that is the question. What is your question that . . . MR. BLAKE: You can sit down, then answer it. MR. DESJARDINS: You'll answer it, all right. MR. BLAKE: No, no, you answered it I said. That's fine. INTRODUCTION OF GUE STS MR. CHAIRMAN: Before I call the next speaker, would like to point out to the honourable members that we have some visitors up in the gallery on my left. It is the Scout group and there are 16 members of the 1st Kirkfield Scout Group under the direction of the Scoutmaster, Mr. Wheel.

This group is in the constituency of the Honourable Minisiter of Cultural Affairs, and I would ask the honourable members to join me in welcoming them here this evening. The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. ARNOLD BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to make a few comments on this particular program. It seems to me that the Minister has been receiving some abuse, especially from the Member for St. Johns, which was not deserved at all.

I think that he is taking a very responsible approach to the whole area of dental service within the province and he is to be commended for this.I think that the Member for St. Bon iface must remember very well that when they first embarked on the Childrens Dental Program and so on, that there never was a word of criticism from the opposition at that time. We recognized that there was a problem in remote areas especially and that type of service was needed where children would receive service through schools, so we did not criticize that program.

As a matter of fact we commended the Minister on the program that he was carrying out at that particular time. But when we want to expand that program and when we come into the southern areas of the province where your population is more dense than what it is in the remote areas, then we have to take a different approach. We have to take a different outlook as to the whole program as far as dental care is concerned; we have to think not only of the children who are in school; we have to think of the adults and also of the senior citizens; we have to think of a small community.

If you would take one third of the patients that they would normally see; if you would take away and have them serviced by somebody else then that small community certainly is never going to receive the services of a dentist. Yet if the dentist can look after the total program, then conceivably a dentis t could esta blish in that particular area and carry out the program which we would hope that he would carry out in a much more efficient manner than if we fragment this. So we have to address ourselves to that particular situation, Mr. Chairman.

I un derstand that we have been very short of dentists, we still are short of dentists, especially in the rural area. There are a lot of them in the city, probably more than what they need, everybody wants to establish over here, but the rural area, by and large, is still short of dentists. And I under stand that there are going to be 28 dentists graduating within a very short period of time, and up to about a month ago only one of those dentists had been placed. Now, there's only one place really that they can look at, and tha t is to establish in rural Manitoba.

So we have to assist these people in getting esta blished, and hopefu lly these rural commun ities themselv es are going to assist these dentists in getting established .I can only think of what we did in my own particular town where we purchased the equipment for the dentist and so on, and we gave him five years in which to pay back for the equipment; we set him up, in other words.

We bought everything for him and we set him up, he's established over there and he's paid back everything that was lent to him at that particular time and he's very successful and everybody is very happy in the community, and I hope that more of these things would happen in the rural communities, and these will have to happen, because it does cost an awful lot of money for a dentist to get established in his own practice. So I hope that these are the things that are going to develop.

I hope that this is the direction that we will be taking, that we will be assuring that everybody, not only the children, but everybody in th e community, are going to have access to dental care. There's another area though, and I would like to just point out, when the members are saying that we are really ... MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. The Honourable Member for St. Bon iface. MR. DESJARDINS: Just for clarification, not an argument.

Is the member, did I hear him correctly, he feels tha t ev entually everybody will be on Denticare, the Denticare that we have for children now will be carried over to senior citizens? MR. BROWN: Ev entually is a long time, Mr . Chairman. But I would say that for the present time cert ainly we could work on some kind of an arrangement where the program which is available in northern Manitoba, and those school districts that now are serviced by this thing, that we could carry forward that program, even if it was done by a dentist rather than by a dental nurse.

There should be no problem there, we should be able to carry that program forward, there should be no problem. But when the members opposite are saying that we really are not doing enough as far as dental care

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-4-44b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 4th hansardpdf 44b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	9752294ccc3782550d8e4088412e5f9ce9c67672

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