Manitoba Hansard — 20 April 1982 (Sitting 37A, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-37a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

• • • • • • • LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 20 Apr il, 1982 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. D. Ja mes Walding (St. Vital): Pr esenting Petitions .. . Rea ding and Receiv ing Petitions ... PRESENTIN G REPO RTS BY STANDIN G AND SPECI AL COMM ITTEES MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Member for Flin Flon. MR. JERRY T. STORIE (Flin Flo n): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adop ted certain resolu tions, directs me to repor t same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honour able Member for Concordia, that the repor t of the committee be received.

MOTION presented and carried. MINIS TERI AL STATEM EN TS AND TABLIN G OF RE PORTS MR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. VIC SCHROEDER (Rossmere): Thank you, Mr . Sp eaker. I wou ld like to table the Repor t of the Min imum Wage Board , dated March 3rd, 19 82. MR. SPEAK ER: No tices of Motion . . . INT RODUC TION OF GU ESTS MR. SPEAK ER: Before we reach Or al Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where there are 10 0 students of Gr ade 9 standing of the Carman Collegiate. These students are under the dir ection of Mr.

Je ff McE achern and they are from the constituency of the Honour able Member for Pem bina. In the loge to my rig ht, is the Mem ber of Parliament for Da uphin, Laverne Lewyc ky. On behalf of all the members, I welcome you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Ar thur . MR. JAMES E. DOWNEY (Arthu r): Mr.

Sp eaker, in view of the headline in the Br andon Sun of last week, could the Minister of Agricultur e tell the House and tell the peop le in the livestock industry in Western Canada that his concept, or his pr op osal, to introd uce a Beef Marke ting Board or a Beef Marke ting Commis sion has nothing to do with the uncertainty that the cattle pr odu cers in the organiza tion that own those stockyards have in their decision whether to rebuild or not rebuild that facility. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Min ister of Agr iculture. HON. BILL URUSKI (Interlake): Mr .

Speaker, the question from the Member for Ar thur with respect to the decision to build or rebuild that facility is in the hands of the Board of Directors of Manitoba Pool. Mr . Speaker, we have been asked to assist them by provid ing some technical help and staff, which we have indicated that we are pr epared to do. In fact, some of the consider ations, as I understand, that are being consider ed by Manitoba Pool are looking at different concep ts of marke ting such as assembling all the cattle in terms of selling them on a slaughter weight basis and having them sold on that basis on a rail grade basis, Mr.

Sp eaker. Those are some of the con sider ations that are being looked at, as I understand, by Manitoba po ol. 1637 MR. DOWNEY: Mr . Sp eaker, what I'm hearing the Minister say is that there are discussions taking pla ce with the Department of Agric ulture and with Manitoba Pool Elevators Board of Directors, is that corr ect? Do I under stand him corr ectly, as to whether or not that will become a government marke ting agency at Bran don versus a priv ately owned farmer s' organ ization , is that what he's saying? MR. URUSKI: No, Mr . Speaker, I'm not saying that.

I'm sayi ng what I said to the honour able member, and I will repeat again, is that Manitoba Pool Elevator s has asked for some assistance in terms of staff input into getting some alternatives looked at, but in terms of whether to build or rebuild that facility is entirely up to Manitoba Pool Elevators who have been, of course, supplying cattle to the plant in Br andon and to the rest of the pr ovince. MR. DOWNEY: Mr .

Speaker, could the Minister of Agr iculture assure Manitoba Pool Elevators and those people who are going to be rei nvesting in that facility, if they decide to go ahead, that his Beef Ma rketi ng Board will not take away products so that, in fact, it would not influence the returns of that new oper ation if rebuilt, would be able to attain? MR. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, decisions of where farmer s will decide to ship of the like will be made by individ ual prod ucers who will decide or not decide to join the prorg ram as well. Mr .

Speaker, I wanted to tell the honourable members, I see a need for a facility in the western par t of the pr ovince, as there has been for many years, because that has been a main gatheri ng po int for cattle in the western par t of the pr ovince. If there is any success in this plan, that marke t can be there. MR. DOWNEY: Mr . Spea ker, would the Minister agree that if his program is su ccessf ul that he has intro duced to suppor t the beef industry and the major ity of beef pr oducers sign up to the pr ogram there in fact would be no need at all for that facility in Br andon?

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 MR. URUSKI: Mr . Chairman, there will be a need for a facility in terms of the market that is there in Brandon for the slaughtering facilities and that will be a deci sion - and in fact I should tell the honour able member that Manitoba Pool Elevators are examining -(I nterjec tion)- Mr . Sp eaker, the honour able members don't wish to hear the answer to my que s tion because they have made up their minds on this very issue. Mr.

Spea ker, the Manitoba Pool Elevators themselves are now examining all aspe cts of, and alternatives to, marke ting in terms of the facility that they have in Br andon. They will be making that deci sion as to whether that facility is rebuilt and how it will be rebuilt and how it will ser ve the produ cers of West ern Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. No rbert. MR. G. W. J. (Gerry) MERCIER (St. Norbert) : Mr. Sp eaker, my question is to the Minister responsi ble for the Worker s Co mpensation Board. Mr.

Speaker, in view of the Minister's recent statements that the Boar d is in need of refo rm, could he identify the pr ob lem· areas and indicate what action he pr opo ses to take? MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Minister of Nor th ern Affairs. HON. JAY COWAN (Chur chill): Mr. Sp eaker, over the cour se of the next number of months, I will cer tainly be identifying in specific and pro viding much detail in respect to the reform areas which I believe are necessary.

I might add that they are not my beliefs alone, that they are shared by many who have come in contact with the Worker s Com pensation Boar d and there are areas where that system can be imp roved . By saying so, I'm not suggesting that there is anything out of the ord inary in respect to initiating and accompl ishing these sorts of reforms. At any given time, any body such as the Worker s Com pensation Board can use some impr ovement and some refo rm. So, over the next period of a couple of months, I would suggest to the Member for St.

Nor bert, we will be addressing those refo rms both in this Leg islature and outside of this Leg islature. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Sp eaker, could the Minister indi cate whether he plans to introduce legislation at this Session in order to deal with l>Ome of these problems and the concerns of the Wido ws and Worker s Hear t Attack Assoc iation? MR. COWAN: Yes, if legislation is fo und to be neces sary in respect to those refo rms which we want to acco mplish right away, I wou ld do every thing in my power to ensure that it is brought before the Leg isla ture as soon as it is pos sible. MR. MERCIER: Mr .

Sp eaker, could the Minister give us a date as to when he will table in this Hous e his amended version of the pri vate inquir y into the Worker s Compensation Board? MR. COWAN: Yes. without accep ting the pr emise of the Member for St. No rbert or, at least, the infe.rence in the prem ise of the Member for St. No rbert that there is anything inappr opria te in respect to our rewriting the repor t to maintain the general thrust of the author of the repor t, but at the same time to remove specific references to individuals who gave their parti cipation to that review under confidential terms.

I would indicate to him that I hope to be able to pr ovide a copy of that repor t to the Leg islature in the very near future, at which time we will have an op por tunity to review those observations and summaries which were brought forward by the person under tak ing the review, and I will indicate to the Member for St.

Nor bert once again, as I have many times in the past, that I will be check ing with the person who undertook the review in order to assure myself and, by doing so, I will assure the House that, in fact, the repor t which is pr ov ided to the House does reflect accurately his per sonal and his pr ofessional observations and summar ies, and that the only differe nce between the repor t which this House will see and the repor t which I saw will be the differ ence in respect to names and individ uals being referenced. MR. SPE AKER: The Honour able Memb er for Lake side. MR. HARRY ENNS (Lakeside): Mr.

Speaker, I direct a question to the Honour able Minister of Natu ral Resources. It's my understanding that the Winnipeg Floodway is once again demonstrating its usefulness to the people of Winnip eg and that it has been in oper ation for the past day-a nd-a-half. Can the Minis ter indicate to us the scale of the opera tion, any diffi culties encountered with the raising of the gates that puts the floodw ay into oper ation and/or any other informati on that he may have as to the number of cubic feet per second now being diverted around the city through the floodway? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Na tural Resou rces. HON. AL MACKLING (St. Jam es): Mr. Speaker, the honour able member is qu ite correct. Both the Red River Floodway Diversion and the Assi niboia Diver sion facility are in oper ation and it is my understand ing they are wor king efficiently. There may be some adjustme nts that are made from time to time, but they are wor king to the satisfaction of the Province of Manitoba. MR. ENNS: I would thank the Minister for that answer.

Ju st one suppleme ntary question, has the Minister been made aware of any difficulties as sometimes have occurr ed when the Floodway initially is put into oper ation in those areas immediately adjacent to the Floodway gates? MR. MACKLING: Mr. Chairman, I had the pleasure of touring the facility on Assiniboine and I was assured that every thing was work ing well there. I haven't yet toured the Red River facility. I expect to be observing that within the next day or so. It is my understanding that every thing is wor king normally. There are com plai nts by residents upstream in the Red River Valley 1638

- . - Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 that the effect of the gates is to create a pond ing action of Red River water to their detri ment. That has not been established by engineering staff in Manitoba to date although those concerns are still evidence to me. MR. SPE AKE R: The Honou ra ble Mem ber for Roblin-R ussell. MR. J. WALLY McKE NZIE (Robl in-Rus sel l): Mr . Speake r. I have a question for the Honour able Minis ter of Finance.

I wonder, is the Minister of Finance pre pared to comment or respond to the severa l news items, briefs, and letters that are cross ing many members' desks fro m communities such as Rob lin, Russell, and other tow ns and municipalities along the Sask atchewan border, extre mely concerned about the pro posed increase in the sales tax in this prov ince and also extre mely concerned about the huge tax cuts that our neighbors are bound to enjoy in Sas katchewan after Monday's election in that great prov ince. MR. SPEAKE R: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR.

SCHROEDER: Yes, I understa nd that the Gov ernment of Saska tchewan is pro pos ing to eliminate a substantial por tion of education taxes over the next four years. I would hope that we could have found ourselves in a position when we took office to have the kind of cap ital constructon pro gram going on here that they have for 19 82-83 in Saskatchewan of $4 billion of investment in that prov ince. We had a bit of a pr oblem here with four years of do nothing government and so we're starting somewhere back.

So, we are in a positi on whe re we are in fact behind Saska tchewan in terms of our ability to come up with tax reve nue. Now, the member asks what my res ponse is to that parti cular concern. As he well knows, I have met with people fro m the Chambers of Commerce from Western Manitoba; I have been writ ing letters to them; I have been read ing the letters that they have written to me. We have their concerns under advisement and, as the member well kno ws, on Budget day he will find out what exactly it is that we are able to do. MR. McKE NZIE: Thank you, Mr. Speake r. I wonder, Mr .

Sp eake r, can the Honoura ble Minister advise the House if he or any members of the Treas ury Bench are prepared to hold discussions with the new gov ernment in Sask atchewan after next Monda y's elec tion or before he brings down his Bud get to make certa in that the proposed tax cuts in Sask atchewan will not destroy the business community and the bus iness climate of many towns and municipalities that touch the border of our great pro vince to the west. MR. SCHROEDER: Well, Mr. Speaker, we've been talking with the Gov ernment of Sask atchewan since we were elected.

In fact, some of us wer e over there in Saskatchewan last summer and we gained some val uable lessons over there and over a period of time, we hope to be in a positio n where we will have the kind of economy where we can be lowering taxes like the Govern ment of Saskatc hewan is doing. I would hop e that my friend on the other side wou ld do whatever he can to ensure that happens. MR. SPE AKE R: The Honou ra ble Mem ber for Minnedosa. MR. DAVID R. (D ave) BLAKE (Mi nnedosa): Thank you, Mr. Speake r. My question is directed to the Min ister in charge of the environment.

I wonder if he could rep ort to the Ho use the progress being made in dispo sing of the carcasses fro m the fire at Br andon Co-op Stock yard s. MR. SP EAKER: The Honourable Minister of Nort h ern Affairs. MR. COWAN: Mr. Speake r, it is my underst anding that the number of dead livestock fro m the Manitoba Pool Stockyards is now estimated to be 600 cattle, 200 hogs and ap prox imately 10 horses. Those are the same figures which we had been pro viding except for the addition of ten horses at this time.

It's diff icult to estimate exactly how many livestock are involved because the carcasses are in some disarray as a result of the fire, but that's the best estimate that we could get as of our final count on Apri l 17 th, when the clea nup was completed. There were 65 truck loads of carcasses which were taken to the Brandon Waste Disposal Grou nd.

There was a pit excavated at the ground on Wednesda y of last week, but because of ra infall and the road becom ing inaccessible as a res ult of that and the pit filling up with water, it was determi ned at that time to choose a seco nd site at the Brandon Waste Disp osal Gr ound which was in what is called the "active area ." The active area is a tre nch in which solid wastes are cur rently being held. The dimension of that active area is app rox imately 700 feet long, 10 0 feet wide and 25 feet deep below the grave. To date, app r oximately 25 feet of garbage has been buried at the active area.

The pit for the burial was located at the middle of the tr ench and app rox imately five feet of burie d gar bage was excavated to create the pit. The app ro xi mate dimension of the pit is 10 0 feet long and 50 feet wide. The actual area that was used for .the burial of the dead carcasses, however, was 50 feet long by 50 feet wide.

Prior to the unloading of the dead stock at the pit, the botto m of the pit was sp read with lime and then they would come in and put a truck load of car casses or they would try to spread a layer of carcasses and then another layer of lime and then spread a layer of carcasses and a layer of lime and they compacted that together.

I might add as Minister resp onsible for the Wor k place Safety and Health Division, that perso nnel spread ing the quick lime were protected by use of vinyl suits, gloves, dust masks, goggles and app rop riate respir ators. 1639 Spec ial monitoring of the buried livestock is not considered to be necessary at this point because there are already methane probes and there is grou ndwater monitoring which is ongoing as a res ult of this being a normal waste disp osal site.

Both groundwater contamination and methane gas hazards were addressed in the pr eparation and the develop ment of this waste disp osal plan and monitoring wells

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 have been established as a re sult in the normal ope ra tion of the pit. We wo uld be more concerned about the methane gas excep t that the soil in that area is surf icial soil which consists mainly of sand and gravel and for that reas on is por ous. Methane gas is pri marily a pr oblem where you have it contained, and we feel that it will seep up and not pres ent a hazard for that reaso n. MR. BLAKE: Thank you, Mr. Speake r.

I wonde r if maybe the Minister might prov ide us with the name of the tr uck drive r that delivered the ani mals fro m the site and also, I understa nd the bulldozer ope rator that excavated the area was not schoole d in metric and that's why he is giving us the dimensions in feet and inches of the particular site. To be a little more serious, Mr. Speake r, I wonder if the Minister could inform the House the names of the re nderi ng pla nts that were contacted in an effort to disp ose of the animals in another way, rather than having them disp osed of in the waste disp osal site? MR.

COWAN: The member should be aware that it is the Pool who would be making the co ntact with the renderi ng pla nts and that the Envir onment Manage ment Division's involvement in that respect would be to advise the Pool and the renderi ng pl ants and the op erators of the Br andon waste disposal site as to our concerns, if any, in respect to the disposal of those carcasses.

So, I can ge t the spe cific detail for the member if he wishes me to prov ide it to him at another date, but I can assure him that he would pro bably get just as accurate detail if he co ntacted those Pool offi cials who are res po nsible for co ntacting the re nder ing plants in order to determine if they would take these carcasses for dispos al. MR. BLAKE: Mr. Spea ker, while the member may be getting the informati on on what plants were con tacted, I wonder if he wou ld ascerta in fro m Manitoba Pool why the re nderi ng division of Canada Packe rs was not contacted? MR.

COWAN: Well now, the member is telling methat Canada Packe rs was not co ntacted. I want the record to be clear that I have not indicated that and that I have indicated to him that it was up to the Pool to, in fact, contact whomever they thought it was necessary to contact. It was the role of the Envir onmental Man agement Division to ensure that whatever disposal took place, took place in repect to the reg ulations which are in place and in an environmentally sound way.

I think if he wants to know why it is the Pool did contact or did not co ntact a specific re nderi ng plant, then perh aps he should ask that question of them. I would not pres ume to speak on their behalf. MR. BLAKE: A final supplem entary , Mr. Speake r. Or iginally, the Minister showed some concern as to what a pr oblem this was, might create health hazards and various other hazard s, and how concerned he was with finding a solution to this pr oblem as qu ickly as pos sible.

I wou ld have felt that his depar tmental officials would have been work ing very closely with Manitoba Pool and offering every suggestion on methods to dispose of those animals at somewhat of a pr ofitable method, supp osed ly. I am surprised that the depar tment officials haven't offered that informa tion to the Pool, that there are other avenues available to dispose of those animals. MR. COWAN: Now, the member seems to be today full of pre sumptions which are not based upon infor mation which is being prov ided to him in this Leg isla ture .

I did not say that our officials had not been in co ntact with the Pool; I did not say that our officials have not addressed this in the most urgent way and in the most comp re hensive way in which they can. As a matter of fact, I have said that they have addr essed this whole issue in that way. I can assure the member and assure the members of this Leg islature and the general public that I have shared that sense of urgency in this reg ard and that I have shared their concern that this be done in the most environmentally sound manner.

However, I have not indicated that I wish to speak on behalf of the Manitoba Pool Livestock Yard. I would think that would be pre sumptuous on my part and I wou ld not want to do so. If the member is asking what contact we have had with re nderi ng plants or what contact we have had with the Pool, I wou ld be more than pleased to prov ide him with that informa tion because it is something which comes under my area of resp onsibility, but if he's going to ask me what contact an outside body has had with another outside body, then I will attempt to find that information out for him and pass it on to him.

However, I would only suggest to him that it would be more ap pro pri ate and pro bably somewhat qu icker to co ntact those individ uals directly to discuss the spe cific concerns with them, but if he wants to find out what contact we've had with differe nt group s, I will prov ide that to him. I had indicated to the Member for Tuxedo that I wou ld prov ide a technical repo rt to him once that became available on this entire matter and I can make that part of the technical rep ort and I am certa in that the Mem ber for Tuxedo will share it with the Member for Minnedosa.

If not, I can make two copies and forward both cop ies to those individual members. 1640 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Turtle Mountain. MR; A. BRIAN RANSOM (Tur tle Moun tain): Mr. Speake r, my que stion is for the Minister of Educ ation. Last fall, during the election, the New Democ ratic Party pr omised an immediate start on the music build ing at Br andon Uni versity. I wonder if the Minister of Educ ation can advise the House whether or not con struction has begun on that building? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou ra ble Minis ter of Educ ation. HON. MAUREEN HEMPHILL (Logan): Mr.

Spea ker, yes, I can advise the House that constr uction has not begun on the music centre at Br andon University. The univers ity has significantly changed the plans, Mr. Speake r, fro m the ori ginal plans that were submitted to the Univers ity Grant s Commission. The amount of space that is prese ntly being req uested, Mr. Speake r, is three times the or iginal req uest and three times the

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 dollar amount. The commitment of the pr evious gov ernment and this govern ment was for the amount of $1 ,600,000.00. The $1 million is being held in trust waiting for the pr ocess to continue that has the Uni versity submitting their plans and req uests through the Un iversity Gr ants Commission and receiving appr oval for those plans. Ther e is one other component to the beginning of the construc tion. The Br andon Univ ersity Board have committed themselves to raise the additional funds. This was not a commitment for full funding by the government, only the 1. 6 million.

They have commit ted themselves to raise $4.5 million. They have begun their Fund Raising Program. It is not clear how far they are along, but I would assume they would have to raise a significant amount of the money before they break gr ound. MR. RANSOM: Mr . Speaker, can I ask the Minister then, is it simp ly the commitment of the pr evious government that is being carried out? MRS. HEMP HILL: I think I am pleased to co mmuni cate, Mr . Speaker, that we are not always in disagree ment, nor should we be.

The Brandon Univ ersity is recognized as a centre of excellence for music and we are pr epar ed to indicate that publicly and to fund on that basis. We are in agree ment with the po sition they took about the benefits gained for that university in the music program for the whole of the pro vince. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able First Minister. HON. HOWARD R. PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr. Sp eaker, last week the Member for Swan River asked me to repor t on my meeting that wou ld be tak ing place in Swan River with the town and the municip ality. Mr.

Sp eaker, I declined at that time to give the Honour able Member for Swan River a repor t until such time as I had oppor tunity to first discuss the school tax situation in the Swan Valley with the appr opria te municipal people and I have had now an oppor tunity to do so.

I want to repor t to the Member for Swan River and all members of the Chamber that there was, it's qu ite clear from the meeting, a general agreement that the difficulties that are confr onting the rate payers of Swan River in connection with an increase in their taxes this year directly relate to the inequities of the program that was passed by the pre vious administra tion in the Province of Manitoba last year. Mr .

Sp eaker, it was indeed recog nized at that meeting that there was a very impor tant factor that had not been recog nized in the form ula that was developed by the pr e vious government in regard to the new school sup por t prog ram.

The missing link was the fact that the pre vious govern ment failed to pro vide for any grant per taining to declining enrolment, and it was point ed out to me at the meeting yesterday, and I shared with those at the meeting, that there had been a 3.6 percent decline in respect to enrolment in the past year, that this had brought about a decrease in connection with per pupil grants to the Swan Valley School Division. Ther e was no pr ovision in the pr ogr am that had been enacted by the pre vious govern ment to pro vide for assistance in situations such as this. Mr.

Speaker, I poi nted out to those pr esent, and it was concu rred with, that this government had pr o vided some $26 million by way of spe cial assistance in and above the supp ort program that was provided for by the pr evious govern ment last year. Of this $26 million, some $1 54, 000 was paid to the Swan Valley S.:h ool Division that would not otherwise have been paid to the Swan Valley School Division.

I want to also repor t to the honour able member that those pr esent were pleased with the informa tion that the Minister of Educ ation is undertaking a one-year review of education financing in the Province of Mani toba in order to attempt to ensure a more equ itable system of financing of ed ucation in the Pro vince of Manitoba, par ticularly in regard to school divisions such as the Swan Valley School Division in which there is, indeed , a low assessment base and a high expenditure per pupil situation. 1641 MR. SPEA KER: The Honour able Mem ber for Turtle Mountain. MR. RANSOM: Yes, Mr .

Sp eaker, I'd like to ask my supplem entary question which I was not able to place before I was interru pted by the Fir st Minister. The Minister of Educa tion stated that 1 million of the 1.6 million was placed in trust. Can she advise whether the other 600, 000 has been tran sferred to Br andon Un iversity? MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Min ister of Education. MRS. HEMPHI LL: No, Mr . Speaker, the other 600, 000 has not been transferred to the Brandon Univ ersity, nor has the initial million been transferr ed.

I think that we are awaiting the appr oval of the plans and the successful fund raising program by the Board of Gov ernor s of Br andon Un iversity to be able to continue their prog ram. We are being pressed every day, Mr. Speaker, about spen ding too much money and about not spe nding money unnecessarily. It would have been fo lly for us to have put $600,0 00 into our Bud get this year that we believe there was no possi bility of being expen ded. It would have added unnecessari ly to our deficit and would have been a very poor move. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Sp eaker, do I understand the Min ister co rrect ly then that the $600, 000 in the '81 -82 Budge t has been allowed to lapse and that there is no money included in the !82-83 Estimates? MRS. HEMP HILL: We have made the commitment for the 1.6 million. We are ready to meet that commitment as soon as they are ready. The 1 million is held in trust. We will meet our other respons ibilities and commit ments as they are req uired, Mr . Speaker. MR. RANSOM: Mr . Sp eaker, can I ask the Minister of Educ ation then whether she will be able to identify that $600, 000 in her Estimates when we get to discus sion of them?

MRS. HEMP HILL : No, Mr . Sp eaker, we will discuss this in Estimates, they are coming up very soon. I can - .

Tuesday, 20 Apri l, 1982 say now that I will not be able to identify the $600, 000 in this Budget, in these Estimates, beca use we did not expect to expend or to have to give out the $600,000 during this year . It would be silly to put $600, 000 into a Budget and have it lapse and add to your deficit when you have no intentions of spen ding it. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Member for Tux edo. Order please, order please. MR. GARY FILMON (Tuxedo): Mr . Speaker, my question is to the Fi rst Minister in fo llow-up to his repor t on the school tax situation at the Town of Swan River.

Can he confirm that between 19 80 and 19 81 , as a result of what he calls the inadequa te program in education supp ort that was put for ward by our govern ment, the mill rate for farm and residential pur poses for Swan River dec reased by 2.5 mills,

whereas this year between 19 81 and 19 82, with his so-called new impr oved progr am that ever yone is sup posed to applaud, that same mill rate for Swan River increased by 15 .1 mills for the farm and residential mill rate levy? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Fir st Minister. MR. PAWLEY: Mr . Speaker, what I do kno w is that from 19 77. for three years, there was a virtual freezing insofar as the pro vision of monies for our school divi sions in the Pro vince of Manitoba under the pr evious administration.

I do know that in the one year prior to the election th ere was a releasing of funds to the school divisions of the Province of Manitoba. I do know, Mr. Sp eaker, as a result of the information that was given to me by the reeve of the Municip ality of Swan River yesterday, that the fo undation levy in the school division insofar as the municipal residents were concerned in Swan Valley had increased by 600 perce nt last year, despite the additional funds that were pr ovided for as a last-year effort by the pre vious govern ment in the Province of Manitoba. MR. FILM ON: Mr .

Sp eaker, I wonder if the First Minis ter wo uld consult with his Minister of Educat ion, who earlier this Session reminded me that there is no such thing as a fo undation levy in this pro vince any longer. That might clarify his thinking about this unfor tunate contr adiction but my question, Mr . Sp eaker, is again to the First Minister.

Can he confirm that the three year commitment that was put forward as par t of the new Ed ucation Supp ort Program announced by the former government pro vided for school divisions , for their supp ort, to receive an increase annually from the Provincial Go vernment that was eq ual to the cost of living index. That addition amount of $26 million, that he says his govern ment put in, was only what was req uired of them by the program instituted by our government. MR. PAWLEY: Mr .

Speaker, what I do kno w, in response to the honourable member's question, is that this govern ment pr ovided additional funds that not otherwise would have been pro vided for under the pre vious prog ram directed towards school divisions of low assessment, high expen diture per pupil, monies that would not have been available under the pre vious progr am. I do kno w because this govern ment pr o- vided those funds, Mr . Speaker, that the school divi sion of Swan Valley received funds that they would not otherwise have had. That I do kno w, Mr. Sp eaker . MR. FILMON: Mr .

Sp eaker, can the Fi rst Minister confirm that when, as he says, there was a 600 percent increase in the so-called foundation levy, which is now called the Educ ation Suppor t Levy under the new system, was increasing by a total of 27.7 mills last year in Swan River. The special levy was decr easing by 31 .2 mills which made a net dec rease of 2.5 mills on the over all education financing for those people . So, in fact their school taxes went down under what he calls an inadeq uate program wher eas this year it's going up by 15 .1 mills. MR. PAWLEY: Mr .

Speaker , I want to say in respons e to the question to the honou rable me mber, I wou ld soo ner listen to the elected rep resentatives in the Swan Valley; to the mayor of the town of Swan River ; to the Reeve of the Municipality of Swan Valley than to listen to comments being raised for obvious purpo ses in this Chamber by the member from Tuxedo because I have confidence enough in the local people with the info rmation they provided to me that there had been a virtual freezing for three years insofar as assistance.

Then, there was a program which was pro vided for last year out of despera tion by the pre vious govern ment, a program that did not pro vide the kind of assis tance that should have been pr ovided to the people of the Swan Valley School Division as well as the people of many other school divisions in the Pro vince of Manitoba. We're moving, Mr . Sp eaker, to undertake a review to remove tho se ineq uities that should never have existed in the first place if the pr evious govern ment had done their jobs pr op erly. MR. FILMON: Mr .

Speaker, can the Minister indicate as par t of the funding that he is now pr oviding for school divisions throughout the pr ovince when the pre vious government had indicated an intention to red uce the burden on the proper ty tax cr edit that instead of carr ying through with the proposal of the former govern ment in tak ing that additional $26 mil lion out of general revenues, his govern ment took the unusual step of adding 4.2 mills across the board to all rate payers in this pro vince, so that they now all pay higher taxes because of his new impr oved pr ogram. 1642 MR.

PAWLEY: I don't know whether the question is in order or not, but I appr eciate the honourable member making that statement to give me an oppor tunity to respond. The $1 54, 15 5 provided to the Swan Val ley School Division red uced the special levy that would otherwise have been charged to the Swan Val ley School Division by 4.3 mills. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for La Ver endrye. MR.

ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): Well, to the Fir st Minister then, I wonder if he could confirm that the school levy for the businesses in the Town of Steinbach is going to increase some 17 .1 mill s and that we are look ing, in the Town of Steinbach, at an increase of 21 .8 percent for school purpo ses only.

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 MR. PAWLEY: Mr . Speaker . I find that it is very well to take these questions as notice. I am pleased I took the question as notice in respect to the Swan Valley School Division, so I could pr ovide members with what actually had happ ened last year under their pr o gram. I wo uld be delighted to take this question in connection with Steinbach as notice too, Mr . Speaker, because I suspe ct very well that this question also may reveal certain very interesting facts as to the nature of the pr ogram that was passed last year by the pr evious administration. MR.

BANMAN: Well, in light of the pr omises of the First Minister during the election campa ign, I wonder if he could inform the House whether he thinks a 21 .8 percent increase to businesses in the pr ovince which are already suffering under the programs and the lack of pr ograms of this par ticular govern ment and who are sufferi ng from high interest rates, who the Fi rst Minister pr omised would not suffer from high interest rates, if he considers that a 21 .8 per cent increase for school tax purposes on a small businessman strug gling in this Pro vince of Manitoba is fair and equ itable. MR.

SPEA KER: The Honour able Fi rst Minister. MR. PAWLEY: What I do kno w, and honourable members across the way obviously do not wish to acknowledge this because they are uncomfor table with the facts, is that this govern ment this year pr o vided more additional funds towards education than that pr evious administration did in the Pro vince of Manitoba dur ing the first three years of their adminis tration, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Mor ris. MR. CLAYTON MANNESS (Morris): Thank you, Mr . Sp eaker.

I'm wonderi ng if the Fir st Minister could confirm or he may want to take it as notice that in fact in the Mor ris McDonald School Division that the sp e cial mill rate has gone up some 46 perc ent, that in fact the balance between the special levy and the educa tion supp ort system is an average of 25 percent, meaning 15 to 18 mills. I wonder if you can confirm that. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able First Minister. MR. PAWLEY: Mr .

Speaker, I'll be delighted to take that question as notice and I think, in view of the information that some of the honour able me mbers are referring to in their various constituencies, other s are remaining interestingly silent. It would demon strate and would pr ove, Mr .

Speaker, the information that I have pr ovided but a few moments ago and that is that there are serious ineq uities that exist within the Education Supp ort Program that was heralded in this House by the pr evious administration as the answer for the educational cost pro blems of Manitoba and that there is need to review that prog ram to remove these inequ ities and all the members op posite are doing is pr oving how weak and how hastily put together the pr ogram of the pr evious Conser vative administration was done in the Pro vince of Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Turtle Mountain. MR.

RANSOM: Mr . Sp eaker, my que stion is for the Fir st Minister. In a news release made last December following a retreat to Hecia Island and it is interesting to note how early they began their retreat, Mr. Speaker, the First Minister prom ised that he wou ld have an economic development pol icy ready within the next two months. I wonder, Mr . Speaker, if the Fir st Minister can advise us when he will have that economic development pol icy ready. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Fir st Minister. MR. PAWLEY: Mr .

Sp eaker, if the honour able members indeed had been follow ing the announce ment of various programs they would be very con scious of the fact that this government, unlike the pr evious administration, has already very very early in its term - well, less than five months, has revealed more positive programs to deal with the economy in the Pro vince of Manitoba than the pre vious govern ment did in four years. MR. SPEA KER: Or der please. Or der please. The time for que stion period having expi red, Or ders of the Day. ORDERS OF THE DAY ADJO URNED DEB ATE -CRO W RATE MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Sp eaker, would you please call the adjou rned debate on the pr oposed motion of the Minister of Transpor tation, standing in the name of the Ho nourable Member for Niakwa. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Niakwa. MR. ABE KOVNATS (Nia kwa) : Stand, Mr . Sp eaker, unless any of the other members care to speak on it. MR. SPEAKER: If no one else wishes to speak on this Resolution, it will stand in the name of the Ho nourable Member for Niakwa. The Honour able Member for Flin Flan. MR. STORIE: Mr .

Sp eaker, I expect to take a consid erable amount of gentle ribbing from the loyal Opp o sition given that I represent the constituency of Flin Flan. I expected that, but I felt that I must make some co mments given my backgr ound. I hop e the Opp osi tion is still thumping their desks when I'm finished. -(I nterjection)- Oh yes, my backgr ound is all behind me.

Ther e are several things that actually stirred me to speak and the first of course is my own backgr ound, coming from the constituency now represented by the Ho nourable Member for Turtle Mou ntain, and I suppo se as well, having gr own up on a farm , I still have a certain affinity for rural communities and the rural way of life. I think, despit e what members of the Opposition might imply, they have no sacrosanct 1643

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 right to repr esent the interests of the farm ing com munity,

whereas I do. I don't think anyone has that type of right to claim that they and they alone rep res ent the interests of any constituency or interest group in this pr ovince. What I am most intrigued about is that,

whereas this group has always maintained that they rep resent the interests of the farm ing community and in the debates that we have just witnessed, the agricultur al debates, there was a good deal of desk thumping and hand wr inging over the Agr icultural Estimates and the poli cies that this govern ment has put for ward in an attempt to deliver some stability to the farming com munities and deliver some sup por t to the farmers out there who are indeed sufferi ng and everyone recog nizes that. Well we've had all this concern fro m the members opposit e on many issues.

What we haven't seen is, in the pre vious four years, anything very constructive by way of helping them with some of their emerging and continuing pro blems and also what we have not seen is any de finitive statement on the par t of Her Majesty's loyal Op posi tion on this issue, on the Cr ow rate debate. We have had two or three speakers, I believe, who have stood up and mumbled rather forcefu lly for up to 40 min utes, but when you analyze what has been said in those 40 minutes, you come to the conclusion that they'r e waffl ing.

Perhaps they're waffling eloq uently, but it is waffling nevertheless. -(l nterjection) Gibberish, if you pr efer. I pers onally and this party, I believe, has a co mmit ment to the farm ing community. I think we take seriously the idea that the agricultur al co mmunity is the most important economic factor which keeps this pr ovince going. I think we recog nize that and I think all the members in this Chamber recog nize the con tribution that the farmer s and the farm ing communi ties make to the life of this pr ovince. No one denies that.

We believe in the family farm , despite what members of the Op posi tion might like some people to believe. We believe, as well, that individuals should have the right to own their farms and to pr od uce on those farms. despit e what the Opposition might like some pe ople to believe, desp ite the motives they might impute to some of the well thought out and some of the honest attempts that we are making to pr otect the farm ing communities and to protect farmer s in these difficult times.

We have heard a con sider able amount of debate from the Opposition about our motives for some of the progr ams and about some of the ways that we've introduced the programs. Well the fact is, Mr . Sp eaker, that at least we have attempted to do something. We may not be over whelmed by waves of gratitude co ming in from the farm ing co mmunities, but that doesn't mean that we haven't been trying. That doe sn't mean that we should n't be getting some recog nition, even from the Opp osition, of the fact that we're making the effort.

We are making the effo rt and they may not like the Beef Stabilization Program and they might not like the Interest Rate Relief Prog ram; they might not like the fact that we bri ng up the fact that they did n't do any thing. Well, the Member for Morris says the cattle produc ers do n't like it. Well, the cattle prod ucers may like going bankrup t more. -(I nterjection)- Well, that's what they would have been doing under your program which was non-existent. The Member for Ar thur says, they'd sooner go bro ke.

Well, the way the Member for Ar thur oper ated when he was Minister of Agricultur e, we wou ld have believe that he thought that they sooner would have rather gone broke. I don't believe they do and I don't believe that anybody says that we have the per fect progr am. Ther e is no pana cea for the ki nds of pr oblems that the agricultural community is exper iencing right now. Ther e may never be a panacea for those types of pr oblems. All we can do is work systematically to resolve some of their pr oblems. Mr .

Speaker, I did n't intend to stand and defend the Depar tment of Ag riculture or the Minister of Agricul ture or, in fact, the agricultural policies of the New Demo cratic Party. What I wanted to do was to bri ng up the fact that we have been attempting with no help fro m some members to bring forward a debate, and we hoped that it would be a debate, on an issue which directly affects the farmer s, which concretely affects them, which affects their wallets more than many of the other issues that have been debated so hotly on the part of the Oppo sition.

My pro blem is, when I listened to the non-debate, when I listened to the non-debate from the members that have spoken on this issue, I was struggling to say, well what is holding the Op posit ion back? Why isn't the Prog ressive Conservative Party coming out four squar e, feet on the floor , hands on the desks, thump ing away at this issue? Why are they sitting back? What is holding them back? We're all aware of the facts. The facts have been discussed ad nauseum in this Chamber. We had a pr esentation a week ago or two weeks ago in which the Depar tment of Agricul ture pr esented some of the details.

We heard very little criticism at that time from members opposite of the spec ific facts that were raised at that time. So the question is, why the si lence? If they believe that the basic facts wer e true as pr esented, then what's hold ing them back? -(I nterjection)- The Mem ber for Mor ris says, well, what's holding them back is the facts that were not pr esented. 1644 I wo uld be inter ested to kno w what facts we don't have. I'll tell you, in my estimation, the facts that we don't have are some rather ski mpy spe culations on what might happen , what could happen if this happens.

The only kinds of facts that we don't have, Mr . Sp eaker, are very skimp y h ypothetical "it's." The Conservative Party and the Leader of the Oppo sition seem pr epared to trade a bunch of "ifs" for a thousand dollars in the poc kets of Manitoba farmer s this year, next year, the year after that and for the foreseea ble future. Yesterday, we heard a couple members, I believe, stand up and talk at length and show great concern about the fact that the metric was going to cost com munities money, a few thousand dollars, $3,0 00 for an individual merchant -(I nterjection)- The metric is not with us yet.

However, they talked at length about the cost to the poor farmer and, while th ere is no question that some of this cost is going to be borne by the consumer s, by the customer s who freq uent the merchants in all co mmunities, including Winnipeg, what we have to wonder is, why is this such a major issue when we kno w the Tr ych niewicz Repor t shows

• • Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 us that at four or five or six limes the established Crow rate that it's going to cost the farmer s thousands of dollars every year ?

No t a few thousand dollar s once while the transition for metric occurs, but thousands of dol lars every year, and I say to myself, why is the Conservat ive Party and the members who, I believe, firmly are committed to their farm ing communities, those that represe nt farming com munities, who tru ly believe in the agricu ltural communities, in the values of those co mmunities, I am convinced that those peo ple rep resent the interests of those communities to the best of their ability. My question is, why on this issue are they not stand ing up rep resenting the farmer s' interests? What is holding them back?

Well, Mr. Sp eaker, as I said, maybe they are waiting for these "ifs," maybe they believe that the CPR cannot make the needed changes to the rail system, and no one denies that changes are needed and that changes will be needed in the future, but maybe they are saying the CPR can't afford this. Well, the facts that I have tell me that's not true. The facts that I have tell me the changes that are requir ed are going to be requir ed because of the expor tation of coal and sulphur and other produ cts. There is going to be some increase in grain ship ments, but that's not the sole reason.

Also, it has been identified that the CPR through its other limited compan ies has all kinds of money that it can invest, if it chose to do so, or if it was made to do so. So the issue do esn't seem to be one of grain being the only means by which the CPR can fund the expansion that is req uired. The fact is that if the Crow rate changes, the net effect to Mani toba farmers is going to be in the range of millions of dollars of lost income, so why the sup po rt? It still doesn't make sense.

Perhaps, the Opp osition believes that the pr omised diversification of agricultur al cr ops is going to be the salvation for the farmer s, is going to be the salvation for the Manitoba economy because, indeed, the agri cultural com munity donates substantially to Manilo ba's economy, but the fact is that Manitoba's agricul tural crops are diversifying in any case. They have been over the last 20 years. Ther e has been phe no menal diversification into all kinds of spe cial crops, so the changes in the Crow rate were not needed to pr oduce those diversifications.

Why is it necessary to assume that further diversifications are going to come about because of changes in the Crow rate or why do we assume that there's going to be an increase in the beef industry or any of the other nice pr omises that Pepin has made when he suggests that changing the Crow rate is a wor thwhile thing to do? In fact, they seem pr epared to change the Cr ow rate; they seem pr epar ed to neglect or fail to supp ort the farmer for benefits which can only be seen to be on the horizon. There is nothing concr ete out there. So I have to ask again, what's the dilemma?

What ideological concept is holding them back from sup porti ng the govern ment on this issue? As far as I can see, there's only one ideologic al hang-up and the Opp osition likes to rail against the Ne w Democra tic Party and against the pr esent govern ment for its ideo logical hang-ups. They talk about the state farm or they talk about all ki nds of other rhetorical words to confuse the issue.

Well, here's a rhetorical word and here's an ideological hang-up that seems to be the pr oblem that the Conservative Party is having with this issue, and the word is "pr ofits." You see, the Conser vative Party slavers over "pr ofits." Is that good? Do you like "slavers?" It makes their eyes bulge; it makes their fingers itch, Mr. Speaker. It 's incred ible. That is what happens. This is the issue, Mr . Speaker, that is pr eventing the Conservative Party from spe aking out. You see, the y have a dilemma, and the dilemma, Mr . Sp eaker, is that the CPR, its weep ing heart comes to Mr .

Pepin and to the Conser vative Party and says, oh poor us, a railway division in the pr ovinces, this little

section is not mak ing money; we're not making profits. Wel l, the fact is that the Annual Repor ts of CP Rail, Mr . Snavely, says that they lost $1 93.7 million, while in actual fact the pr ofits were 276 million, but they are still losing money and -(I nterjection)- they are on one seg ment; but you see the dilemma is that the Conserva tive Party believes that everyone is entitled to make their profit. That's what they believe and I'm sur e they would all har dily stand and cheer the notion that everyo ne deser ves to be able to make a pr ofit.

Well the CPR isn't making a profit off this little oper ation and it concerns them greatly. No t just because the CPR donates to the Conservat ive Party; I'm not suggesting that would have any influence on these members. Forg ive me, I lost my head. To make that kind of suggestion, I'm sorry, it was irres ponsible and I cer tainly won't ever do it again unless I have to. I still think that's the issue. What we have is a dilemma. Should we let the CPR make a pr ofit, or should we let the farmer make a profit, or at least get closer to making a pr ofit?

The Honour able Member for Ar thur says he pr efers the farmer. We will see how he votes on this issue. We will see when the crux of the matter is pr esented and the issue is, should we let CPR make all kinds of pr ofits on all their divisions, or should we let the farmer make some pr ofit? We will see, we're for the farmer. The honourable members are indicating their sup por t for the govern ment resolution. It should be on the record now that the loyal Op position supp orts the governments resolution.

Actu ally that's some thing that's wonder ful to kno w because of cour se there's a lot more strength in unity than in division. Mr. Speaker, in concluding I would only say that it is my hope that this dilemma that faces the Conser vative Party does not seriously divide them.

I hope that the members in the Opposition who represent the farm ing community can maintain their unity and fight off those slavering dogs of capit alism in their own par ty and can come forward as a group and sup por t the govern ment's resolution so that we can take it to the Federal Govern ment and say ther e are no benefits in you'r e pr oposal for Manitoba, there are no benefits for the farmers of Manitoba in your pr opos al, there are no benefits for the people of Manitoba; if there are any benefits they go to other pro vinces. We do not sup port you, we do not supp ort changing the Cr ow Rate.

It is a historical, it is an impor tant par t of the agricu ltu ral community and we do not accept changes to it lightly. 1645 Thank you, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Is the Honour able Member for Niakwa now prepared to continue.

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 MR. KOVNATS: No, not right at this time, Mr . Sp eaker. I was going to move adjourn ment on the debate but if it stands in my name I'll be satisfied. MR. SPEAKER: If no other member wishes to speak to the reso lution it will stand in the name of the Hon ourable Member for Nia kwa. The Honour able Govern ment House Leader. HON. LAURENT DE SJARDINS (St. Boniface) : Mr . Speaker I'd like to move, seconded by the Minister of Tourism and Economic Development that Mr .

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Ma jesty with the Honour able Member for Flin Flon in the Chair for the Depar t ment of Health and the Honour able Member for The Pas in the Chair for the Depar tment of Ec onomic Developmen t and Tourism. CONC U RRENT COMMITTEES OF SU PPLY SUP PLY - ECONO MIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM MR. CHAI RMAN, Har ry M.

Har apiak (The Pas): We will call the Comm ittee to or der. We are in Economic Devel opment and Tourism, we ar e on (b)

(1) Ad ministration. The Member for Ar thur. MR. DOWNEY: Mr . Chairman, I understand that we're dealing with industry and trade as it relates to trade development. Probably the comments that I would have to make wo uld pr obably fit in next on Ind ustrial Development No. 2, so I would wait until that par ticu lar time to make my comments. MR. CHAIRMAN: (b )(1) -pass; (b)

(2) In dustrial Development - the Member for Ar thur . MR. DOWNEY: Mr . Chairman, I am pleased to be able to par ticipate in the Estimates of the Depar tment of Economic Developme nt and before I put my com ments on the record, I want to compliment the pr e vious Minister of Economic Developme nt who, I think, with his depar tment, with the department that I rep re sented or worked with, the Depar tment of Agricultur e, worked very well to bri ng about some fairly major developm ents in the food and agricultur al pr ocess ing industry.

One good example of that, of course, is the Harrowby Oi lseed Crushing Plant that is now being developed at Russell or at Harr owby . Manitoba Pool Elevators, Saskatchewan Wheat Pool worked very closely with the Department of Agricultur e and the Depart ment of Ec onomic Development to establish that par ticular plant in that par ticular region. I would further, Mr .

Chairman, to that par ticular facility want the Minister to respond in a way in which I think would be helpful to the investors in that par ticu lar facility, the farm community who have, through the Pool Elevators, have made an investment of some $40 million; have guaranteed or will be hiring some 80 people; will be in fact pr oviding some markets for some 3, 000 farmer s for pr obably 25 percent of their acreage on an annual basis; that kind of developme nt bri ng some - if we were to look at it in dollars and cents - pr obably $300-$500 million in a ro ugh figure into the Province of Manitoba and Saskatchewan but I would say more so to the Province of Manitoba, and that, Mr.

Chairman, to you is some of the develop ments that took place under the past Minister of Eco nomic Development. I am pleased that he is sitting in on Committee because I think he has something to be very pleased about, that he has actually made that kind of thing happen through his hard work and endeavour . Mr . Chairman, when I look at the Industrial Devel opment that says, "pr ovides resources to create new emplo yment oppor tunities," he spent the taxpayer s money last year under this appr opr iation to do some positive work and to do in fact what that says, create new emplo yment op por tunities.

At the same time, Mr. Chairman, he did not take the poli tical appr oach and try and gain cheap pol itical marks by standing up causing a great argument in the farm co mmunity over the Crow rate issue, because, Mr . Chairman, that is truly a political issue. When you start look ing at some of the facts, I think, that what we have seen the gov ernment par ticipate in now, will surely come home to haunt them when you start ad ding up the job oppor tunities, the kinds of pr ocessing facilities can develop like we've seen the last Minister.

He did n't introduc e a reso lution to not discuss it, to bury their heads in the sands, but he's, at least, Mr . Chairman, develop ed jo b oppor tunities through that kind of a facility. Mr .

Chairman, the pr esent Minister, I would hop e, in her po sition and talking about Crow rate, about job oppor tunities, could lay on the table, could lay befo re the people of Manitoba, either a supp ort program for the oil seed crush ing people, for those people at CSP and the Farmer 's Co-o p, the Manitoba Pool Elevator s and the Saskatc hewan Wheat Pool, her commitment to pro vide funds to move out oil seed oil after it is crushed, so that they have eq uity with the Provinces of Saskatc hewan and Alberta.

Her tak ing the po sition that she has taken on the Crow rate should encourage her, or the farm people should be at least pr epar ed to expect -t hey should expect, and she should pro vide it - funds for a rail transp ortation subsidy for oil that is pr od uced from that oil seed crushing plant. They entered into an investment in good faith, they pr o ceeded to build that par ticular plant. 1646 Let's just put it into perspective, Mr .

Chairman, because we now have an oil seed crush ing plant that emplo ys pr obably 80 people , $40 million, and I said it pr ovides a market for 3,0 00 farmer s, 25 percent of their acreage of rapeseed ; that's pr etty good eco nomic development, Mr . Chairman. But the alterna tive to that is to pr obably maintain five elevators that would collect that same amount of rape seed, five ele vato rs - one wou ld do it but let's say five, give her the benefit of the do ubt - five elevators, with five elevator managers, moving that raw commod ity out of the pro vince.

Well, an elevator costs appr oximately $1 million to $1.5 million of investment that's already in place; it wouldn't mean any new investment. So, you have appr ox imately a $5-m illion to $1 0-million

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 investment in elevators that are currently there, five employment oppor tunities and that is that. But, Mr . Chairman, this oil seed crushing plant has added to the over all econo mic development of west ern Manitoba and we'll leave the Crow rate issue out of it, but I think people will start to see after they look at the whole pr ocessing industry that there are some things to be gained by at least trying to reassess what the benefits are through the Crow rate and through what the pr ocessing industry can do for Manitoba pr oducers. Mr.

Chairman, so I would hope the Minister wou ld either prepar e to do a study, have her industry lay some facts on the table for her, or be pr epar ed to put financial suppor t into the oil seed crush ing industry as a subsidy to move the oil out of Manitoba, because today, it has to com pete against the Crow rate. Now, I hope she will respond to it and it would be an interest ing situation for her to respond. The gasohol business, Mr. Chairman, I spoke pr etty elabora tely on that last night, tried to make the poi nts that I think have to be made again.

The Minister of Economic Developme nt, as a member of Cabinet, and the Minister of Energy and the Minister of Finance, Ministers of Agricultur e and their departments, all worked very hard to create the economic climate by removal of road tax, so that the peo ple who are pr o ducing gasohol at Minnedosa could so competitively. And what have we just heard and seen, Mr. Chair man? We have seen a 400- percent increase in the business that company is doing because they are now selling gasohol and what has that done?

Ther e has been another recent announcement that they are expand ing their barley quo tas to the pr od ucers of barley so they can get higher returns for their barley. For the Minister, Mr . Chairman, who last night was concerned that we were using a food product to pr o duce alcohol to produce more horsepower to pr o duce food , it doesn't wash. That by pr oduct, which is pr otein, goes into the livestock industry to pr od uce red meat which we are all anxious to see prod uced, so the fact that we're using food is not of major conse quenc e.

In fact, it creates a better market for the bar ley produ cers and they in fact, as the Member for Lake side said, it's just that much less barley that goes into the beer pr od uction, so it really isn't that big a concern, I think, to the general popula tion. At the same time, I tried to make the point , Mr . Chairman, that if we look back in the 19 20s, 20 percent of Nor th Ame rican agricultur e acreage was in the prod uction of oats to feed horses to prod uce horsepower to pr o duce food. So, Mr . Chairman, think we have to some what put those arguments aside.

I wou ld hope that the Member for Minnedosa who had large par t to play in the over all development of the gasohol plant at Min nedosa would as well have some comments to put on the record. I would further, Mr . Chairman, like to ask the Minis ter what has taken place with the study that is being done or has been done on the development of a fruc tose sugar pro ducing plant from corn. I know that the Minister prior to the current Minister's term in office had done a study in conj unction with the Depar tment of Agr iculture.

We have, in this pr ovince, turned from being an impor ter of corn several year s ago to now a pr oducer of corn, some 20 million bushels last year which has gone up fro m pr actically zero in, pr obably, 19 76. We have now gone to some 240,000 acres of corn pr od uction. We are seeing at least 10 times the needs of the Gimli Distillery being produ ced within the pro vince and I kno w that his department and now her depar tment as well as the Agricu lture Depar tment were doing a feasibility study on the development of a pr ocessing industry to prod uce sugar from corn. It's not new; it is being done in On tario.

I'm sure there are two plants there. It is done in other par ts of Nor th America. I am as well aware, Mr . Chairman, that the majorit y of the soft drink produ cers - I'm not sure; I won't name them - but I think the majo rity of them now use fructose or corn pr oduced sugar for sweetener in their drink s and we all kno w the volume of soft dr inks that are consumed in this country. So, I would hope that study has borne fruit. As well, Madam Minister, the constituents of the Member for Ste. Ro se wer e unable to get any action from him. I met with them last fall.

They were anxious to develop and establish an Alf alfa Processing Plant in the Ste. Rose -Mccr eary community. I kno w that members of the staff of the Department of Economic Development have been involved in wor king on that kind of a prog ram. I wou ld hop e the Minister is able to respond to those kinds of positive developm ents. I, again, will remind her of the question that I asked last night. How many people have gone out of busi ness, or how many pe ople have lost their jobs in min ing, in agricultur e, the cheese plants?

I, again, won't go through that argument I put fo rward to her last night and I will ask her again the question that I asked last night: does she sup por t the MANCO worker s or the principle that the MANCO worker s are pr epa red to accept, that they will take a 15 percent reduction in wages to keep that plant going, that all people in the work ing force if they are to maintain their jo bs should be pr epar ed to negotiate with the companie s they work for rather than to put them out of business? Ar e they prepar ed to accept less, as I believe everyo ne in society during tough economic times are?

Does she supp ort that principle or does she still maintain that we should see a continued pr essure on increased wages without having incr eased productivity? Because, Mr . Chairman, through you to. the Minister, that's wher e it's at. You can't keep demanding more out of a system and not keep putting more into it and that's the reason we're in the economic difficulties we are today. We have seen too much pr essure com ing from groups in society who demand more out of the system than they are pr epar ed to put into it, and it doesn't work . 1647 We're into that kind of an economic recession right now.

The Minister has admitted it and I wou ld hope she wou ld be prepar ed to put some of her pol icies and pri nciples on the record . Unf ortunately she has one answer and that's, we need to have a regulated and a contr olled socie ty so that they as a government can divide up eq ually all those losses that we're prepar ed to expect to make. Why doesn't she take a look at the incentives and the reward that come through pri vate initiative, reward , prod uction and development of our resources, rather than the tight eco nomic regulatory type system she believes in?

I again go back and ask her, does she believe then that system that has been put forward or

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 that proposal that has been put forward by the Ma nco worker s of Pilot Mound, and if she doesn't sup por t it, why doesn't she suppor t it? And how many people have lost their jobs in mining, manufacturing in the entire secto r since No vember 17 ? All those pe ople that she promis ed during the election campaign that wouldn't lose their jo bs. Thank you, Mr . Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honour able Minister. HON. MURIEL SMITH (Osborne): Yes, Mr. Chair man.

Starting at the beginning, the CSP Plant is a pr oject that was developed under the pre vious gov ernment and it is a fine example, I think, of how govern ments work ing together can help with such a development. It does come under - not just to be technical, it doesn't mean we can't talk about it - but it does come under the Enterpris e Manitoba Shar ed Funding for the Feder al-Pr ovincial Funding under Project One, and $3.6 million was put into that crush ing plant to help with the co mmunity infrastructure. -(I nterjection)- Ok ay, take a bow Fr ank. He's mo.dest.

I take minor issue with the idea that everything done by our Opposition is somehow apolitical or non politi cal,

whereas every thing we do is polit ical. It reveals that a percep tion of the wor ld wher e somehow there's only one truth and that's how the Sp eaker sees it and I submit to the group, that it's not a very mature appr oach to political dialogue. We at least know that there are differe nt po sitions and different philo so ph ies which are held in good faith and they bri ng with them different views of how the eco nomy works, what the goals of the gove rnment are and what the under ly ing values, if you like, are that we are pur suing and therefore this kind of debate we're engaged in is a very legitimate one.

I have my pol itical appr oach and the honourable members op posite have theirs, to which they are fully entitled. So I do take qu ite a different appr oach to this idea that somehow we're being pol it ical,

whereas they aren't. With regard to Crow, CSP and transpor tation costs, I'm not sure if the honour able member was pr esent the other day in the Ho use, but I did dr aw to the attention of the House that CSP have been to see us and have given us material analyzing their position and that what they have made very clear to us is, that the key pro blem they'r e encou ntering now is not compe ting against Crow rates. it is competing against Alberta and Saska tchewan crusher s who are being subsidized by the government for their transpor t. Now you did ask that qu estion as well.

I would submit that it's prema ture for us to make a commit ment on that issue until we see what the outcome on the Crow is, because maintaining the Crow and developing a different appr oach to funding the rail ways is our pr eferred po sition and until that sorts itself out - not that we won't think about the other - but we're not about to commit ourselves on what we're going to do.

What really never ceases to amaze me and I think we've had an excellent demons tration of it, is how a member of the Opp osition, who can make a lot of keeping govern ment out of business and out of the pri vate affairs of people, out of the eco nomy, on one 1648 hand can plead so per sistently for the govern ment jumping into business when it's going to suit - dar e it be said - the farm community, the farm co mmunity which happ ens to be the economic interest group to which he belongs.

Now I can under stand him wanting a good deal for his group but I submit what we want is the best possi ble deal for all the group s. So the pro blem we said ourselves is not a simple one of being contradi ctor y saying, government go away when it doesn't suit us, and govern ment come and help when it does. Our pro blem is how to plan and carry on an active gov ernment program so that we get the best that's rea sonable for all the groups in the community.

Gasohol, sh ould it be made out of barley, which can be consider ed a food crop and could either prod uce horses or feed peo ple or make beer, or should it be pr oduced out of wood pulp, such as we were suggest ing last night?

I submit that there is pr obably room for both in the fuel-hungr y world of the future but that on the basis of what I kno w and understand, not only of Manitoba economics, but Canadian and global, it makes a lot more sense to go for something that's currently a waste prod uct and doesn't have an alter native economic use, rather than a food crop which does very demonstrably have another potential use, or the land on which it's grown has another pote ntial use.

With regard to the Fruc tose Program made from corn, I'm happy to repor t that possibi lity is still very much alive and that there will be a meeting later this month with rep resentatives from that company where we'll be look ing at their needs in terms of water, energy suppl ies, transpor tation and the kind of pr o grams we have available to see if we can put together an effective co-operative package. With regard to the Alfalfa Programs, that making - is it pel lets - there is an active industry in the Dau phin area that is carr ying on and the informa tion I have is that it's thrivi ng.

I'm not sure if the member asked a more specific question than that, that I missed. If so he'll get full chance to extend that question. Down to the MANCO wo rkers. I am interested to hear that there is a solution being worke d out ther e in the area of a different wage plan so that the company can be kept alive. I think the two princi ples that I would like to supp ort very strongly are, that worker s and emplo yer s and indeed owner s have access to all the informa tion about an oper ation.

It is my belief and under standing that worker s who understand the eco nomics of an opera tion feel that they are included in the informa tion and behave in a very responsible way when it comes to wage negotiations. But I think the members op posite sometimes forge t that when we talk about raising minimum wage, it doesn't necessar ily mean that the total wage packet has to be increased. There is such a thing as developing a narrower split in the wage package. That's certainly the appr oach that the Jap anese are following and they seem to have a very low unemployment and high pr oductivity record .

So I submit that it's quite -(l nterjection) please, I did n't interru pt you. Please don't interrupt me. That they have achieved high pr oductivity and high emplo yment rates by fo llowing that type of pr o gram and I submit that we are not being contrad ictor y

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 in wor king for increased produ ctivity, viability along with increasing the wages to the people at the lower end of the sp ectrum. So I too, hope that the MANCO situation will reso lve itself and if the worker s and the owner -emplo yer can get together - well, it's organ ized as a co-operative - if they can come to an agreement on how much money will go into wages and how much into the oper ation or expansion of their pl ants, so be it. I think that's the model in a sense we would be happy to see extended to many other industries.

I guess the last question the honour able member asked was: Did I believe in a system that rewarded pr ivate initiative or tightly regulated? I think to pr es ent the economic alternatives in that way is qu ite legitimate for the honou rable member because that's the way he sees the world. I and my colleagues don't see the choices before us structured in that way. We believe that pri vate initiative indeed, needs supp ort and encour agement but that money rewards are not the only kind of rewards and that giving a reward for pr ivate initiative is not the only goal that we have.

We also believe that we have a collective responsibi lity for those members of our society who have either been excluded in the past or been pushed to the bottom of the ladder and so, we believe in developing an eco nomic and social system which spr eads rewards out and benefits out, but also puts out expectations that people contr ibute as well. To that end we would like to have a system where people do have the fullest possi ble oppor tunity to work and contribute. We don't believe in promoti ng social assistance as an end in itself.

We see it as a necessary component of a system to pro vide tempor ary supp orts to people between jobs, or to pro vide some kind of assistance to people who don't have the strength or health to be fully self supp orting. but it's not a goal. The goal of our society is one where everyo ne does get a share of the op por tunity to work and to receive benefits, so I know the honourable member won't feel I've answered the question he put but I submit, that way of looking at the economic options is a very limited and unpr oductive way of looking. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ar thur. MR. DOWNEY: I'll be very brief.

I have three spe cific questions. but for the Honour able Minister's informa tion, it was the com munity of Mccr eary that isn't too far from Da uphin, as well we're interested in an Alfafa Process ing Plant and wonderi ng if there could be in fact. some company interested in the development of that. I just leave it on the record that I would hope the depar tment would pur sue that and maybe the Minis ter could get back in writi ng, an answer to me of what stage or ... The next question is, what company is it that is look ing at building a Fru ctose Sugar Plant in Manit oba?

If the Minister is able to disclose that name, fine; if not, for their par ticular reason I haven't got any difficulty but it would be interesting to know what company is interested in building a Fruc tose Sugar Plant in Manitoba. She hasn't answered how many worker s have been laid off since the No vember 17 th election in the Prov ince of Manitoba. They must have a record of how many layoffs there've been in the different plants that have closed and the oper ations that have slowed down.

I would ask the Minister how many new businesses, pr ocessing industries, manufacturing plants have been established since she's beco me the Minister of Economic Developme nt. MRS. SMITH: Mr . Chairper son, I noted your req uest about the Mccr eary op tion. With regard to the fructose plant, it's not our pr ac tice to discuss publicly the names of companie s when we're in a negotiating stance and that's a confidential ity that I'm sure the member op posite will understand and respect. With regard to unemplo yment, I can obtain exact figures. They are increasing.

I think it is naive to expect a new govern ment to be able to alter the - (I nterjection)- well, I don't know qu ite what world you live in, honour able member, but I kno w the world I live in is -(I nterjection)- I believe I have the floor. The world I live in is a difficult and a complic ated world. The role of op erating a govern ment is a com plex oper ation, changing direction, developi ng new programs, is not a thing that happens with a cast-of-t he-wand.

Election day gives a new group of peo ple the oppor tunity to build and to put their prior ities into action, that you know and I know and I think ever yone sitting in this room kno ws, that those kind of developm ents take place over time. We are in favo ur of being an active govern ment but we'r e also in favo ur of being a pla nning government and that means very careful, thor ough appr oaches. We cannot do every thing; we are guardians of the publ ic money, that taxpayer's dollar that those of you are very prone to talk about on many occasion.

We too, care about the accountability to the tax payer and the kind of things we are able to do are taking time but I think we've been throu gh that before. We have our shor t-term programs which will have some impact in the next few months and we have the longer term programs, which will make a difference. No w how much difference they'r e able to make is going to depend on the national and international economic forces. It may be that if we're riding a great wave down, that all we can do is keep a few more people from drowning and keep alive some hope for the upswing.

Maybe we can alter the shape of the wave a little but we can't eliminate the fact that we're all carried on somewhat on the national and interna tional economic developments. MR. DOWNEY: Did the Minister say she was going to pr ovide the numbers of layoffs and peo ple who've lost their jobs since the 17 th of No vember? MRS. SMITH: Yes, I undertook that, to the extent we have that data, I will undertake to seek a answer. 1649 MR.

DOWNEY: The second question, is she going to pr ovide the numbers of new businesses. manufactur ing plants, pr ocessing industries that have started since No vember 17 th, under her new programs ? MRS. SMITH: Well, Mr . Chairper son, we have made

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 an announcement of the 3M Plant opening up and there are others in pr ocess, but you know and I kno w and certa inly my pr edecessor in this ministry kno ws, that it takes a long time for these progr ams to come to fruition and for announcements to be made. I can get a list of those pr ojects which have been announced since No vember 17 th, but fr ankly I don't know qu ite what value it would be because there wo uld be the culmination of the pr ograms which you'r e familiar with. I am glad that most of the programs are ones that we can endor se suppor t and continue to nurture.

There are a great series of grants that have gone forward and small prog rams, the usual consultations. I don't kno w qu ite what purp ose it would serve to give you the list of publicly announced programs but if you wish to have that, I'll certa inly undertake to get you that kind of a list. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lakes ide. MR. ENNS: Mr . Chair man, through you to the Minis ter. I appr eciate that I wasn't present at the Com mittee when pe rhaps so me of the subject matter that I want to r.aise has already been discussed.

I want to assure the Miriister that I want to appr oach it pe rhaps so me what differently and I'm referri ng to the Alcan pr oject that has of course, indicated its desirability to locate in the constituency of Lak eside. Mr . Chairman .

I'm not asking the Minister for a definitive statement on behalf of herself or that of her government, as to whether or no t an agree ment will finally be concluded with respect to the Alcan peo ple or whether or not it will be possible for her govern ment on other matters, whether or not a satisfactory arrangement with respect to energy, the hydro-e lectric question, I under stand that those are major pol icy decisions that the government will arrive at or not arrive at in due cour se.

What I would like to ask of this depar tment and of this Minister is though, tha t that will not pr ec lude Alcan from concluding its final feasibility studies that are currently under way, which have been under way for the past number of months, a better par t of the past year. It's a very substantial study, involving some $4 to 5 million, we we re orig inally told.

Then of course I'm aware of some of the site work that is under way in developing from Alc an's point of view, to Alc an's satisfaction, their final satisfaction that yes, it is feasi ble to build that producti on plant, that smelter plant on that par ticular site. I would like to hear from the Minister whether or not she will ensure that her department will do anything and every thing pos sible to assist Alcan in carr ying out those feasibility studies.

I hope the Minister appr e ciates that I'm not ask ing her to commit herself or her government as to whether or not they will conclude an agreement with Al can, but she mentioned in response to a pre vious question, that she is par t of a pla nning government and I congratulate her for being that.

I wo uld like to think that while there may be serious reservations as to some of the terms that have been offered by the Aluminum Comp any of Canada with respect to their desire in locating in Manitoba, that may or may not be acceptable to her or this govern ment - that's a matter for another debate and that's a matter obviously fo r a policy decision on the par t of this government - but I'm concerned that we don't waste valuable time or that the department doesn't see it as . . that we don't waste valuable time, or that the depar t ment doesn't see it as its natural respo nsibility to assist a major potential emplo yer of Manitobans, a major potential pr od ucer of increased economic activity in the Pro vince of Manitoba, to allow them to conclude their final feasibility studies which are cur rently under way.

I'm hoping that they're under way; I'm hoping that the Minister can tell me that they have not bee n aborted and I include by this and I solicit her supp or t in that, again, what I would believe to be a legitimate function of the Department of Economic Developm ent, to act with some leadership in terms of the other depar tments of govern ment involved, so that the necessary socioeco nomic studies are in fact being undertak en. We had, of cou rse, a sched ule of dates for these to commence.

Many peo ple in my constituency look ed forward to the public asp ect, to some of the hearings that need to be held by agencies such as the Clean Envir onment Comm ission and I would like to hear from the Minister whether she sees her role, the role of her department, as one of ensuring that these feasibil ity studies do conclude and that we then at least have that data available to assist govern ments in making a decision. I wo uld ask the Minister to respond to that. MRS.

SMITH: Honou rable member, the feasibility studies are, in fact, being done by Alcan and nothing's been done to inhibit their ability to carr y on th eir studies, so as far as we're concerned they are com pleting their study. I, as you know, am not the lead Minister with regard to these pr ojects , but I am par t of the committee that is wor king on them. Certa inly the Honou rable Mr . Parasiuk will be able to give you all the detail you want when you meet with him, but I think I spent about two hours on this the other day, so I certa inly had no intention of not discussing the issue.

The point I made then and would like to make now, is that the government wanted to have in place their own analysis and framework within which to nego tiate with Alcan from a po sition of knowledge and strength. Beca use there was not a lot of that prepa ra tor y data available when we took over, it's tak ing time to get all of that into place. The social economic stu dies will go ahead; there has been a further meeting with Mr . Ja cq ues Bougie. Public hearings will cer tainly be a part of the social economic study.

So, I think on all poi nts, I can really satisfy the member that this is still a very live pr oject and the delay was neces sary from our point of view to do the research about the public benefits, but it hap pens to have coincided - well we're not par ticularly happy about this - but it happ ens to have coincided with a slowdown on Alcan's part although we all kno w that op era tions of that scale take many years to plan and get into opera tion. Never theless, the speed with which they move ahead on their pr ojects is affected by the world situa tion of price and demand.

Just the other day, there was an announcement by Alcan of a major slowdown of a pr oject in Australia, the - I think, Kooka burr a - I 1650

Tuesday, 20 Apr il, 1982 may not have the name quite accurately, but of a pr oj ect that they were engaged in. So, they are not pr essing with any urgency in terms of these negotia tions, but they are still very actively involved as are we. MR. ENNS: Mr . Chair man, I appr eciate the Minister's com ments.

I supp ose what I'm looking for and what I'm extending to the Minister, is the fact that I see the Depar tment of Econo mic Development, despite the fact that there are other Ministers involved; that also was the case in the pre vious administration when or iginal discussions took place with this particular development pr ospect, but I see the Depar tment of Economic Development as being very much in a lead ership role in this question.

It may well be because of the structu res of Cabinet, because of the Hydr o invol vement, because of the very substantial financial involvement that the Ministers of Finance, the Minis ters of Energy and Mines are certainly par t of the team that you speak on and that you are par t of.

But phi losophic ally, the Department of Economic Development - leaving all the other issues aside that are of concern to the pr esent government with respect to Alcan - the depar tment, philosop hically, surely must see the massive pot ential of fulfilling their man date in provi ding jobs for Manitobans, in pursuing their ro le in this parti cular develop ment. I believe I've heard that is tak ing place. I would simp ly like to put on the record that certainly I think the department's act ing properly, if in fact, that is the case.

I think that decisions that have to be made and will be made, whether on the par t of the company for their own economic reaso ns or, indeed, on the par t of the government for their economic and political reasons as to what kind of agreement they can or cannot live with. I don't pr esume to impinge on this Minister's or this govern ment's role in that decision making.

I can tell the Honour able Minister and I want to take a moment to at least put on the public recor d that, having rep resented a good por tion of the Interlake for the past 16 year s in public life, the Minister should not be at all deluded by the tremendous interest there is for the job potentials of an oper ation of this scale and size in the Interlake.

The Interlake is a par t of Manitoba that historical ly and trad itionally is po pulated by marginal farm fami lies, farm ing oper ations, cattle oper ations, that very often pr ovide less than full-time employment for their owner s; have traditionally expor ted so many of their young people and, indeed, adults to various par ts of the pr ovince and the country in search for appropria te work; that the level of expectations that upwards to 700 or 1, 000 or 2, 000 construc tion jo bs dur ing the five-yea r, six-year, seven-year construction period should be made available within the Interlake.

It has a very strong understandable level of accepta nce. No w, I certainly appr eciate that very serious envir onmental questions have to be adeq uately responded to. We are very much aware of some of the advantages that we have in the Interlake with respect to wildlife facilities. One that comes immediately to mind, of course, is the very well-received and successful Oak Hammock Wildlife Sanctuary that is visited by so many Manitobans, which is within the pr oximity of the pr op osed plant site.

So, there is no question that these issues have to be, 1651 and I would be the first to ensure that adeq uate time for full public discussion, full public par ticipation in the various meetings that I'm pleased to hear are still being planned for that area, and when they take place. But the Minister should, and this govern ment should not allow themselves to be in anyway deluded about the fact that the pr omise for economic security that a pr oject of this nature holds out for.

Many residents of the Interlake and, indeed, for many residences of Manitoba, but I tend to speak somewhat more paroch ial at this par ticular time, that the attraction that this pr oject has for lnterlaker s, and I wou ld ask her to, upon familiarizing herself with various pr oblems associated with a pr oject of this magnitude, but cer tainly to accept the leader ship role that I think the Department of Ec onomic Development corr ectly ought to assume in bri nging a pr oject like this to a successful fruition in the Province of Manitoba. MRS.

SMITH: Yes, I am happy to hear that the member recognizes that when you'r e dealing with Ec onomic Development you have to look at environ mental and social issues and I think that's the appr oach that I, and my colleagues, are tak ing to Economic Deve lopment. We don't see it as just the creation of jo bs, we see it as a lot of other things as well. Some of our basic economic strategy is to try and have more investment resources here in Manitoba so that we can, in the future, increase our capacit y to control our own economic destiny and to maintain long-term economic security.

In the shor t run, I believe the type of leader ship that I can best contribute, and it's a style tha t I like and believe in, is to work very co-o per atively with my col leagues. We are not engaged in a tug of war between depar tments; we do consult and we do co-ord inate and our Cabinet does work very much as a team that shar es an economic strategy and shar es a commit ment to the sequencing of public expenditur es that we have come up with. I guess that's really the mes sage I would like to leave with the member.

I have ideas and I have energy and I have commitment and I take those appr oaches with me in whatever meetings I'm with and you can rest assured that I am not going to rest easy until we have a much mor e secur e econ omy her e in Manitoba. I do have answers for you on a few of the questions you asked earlier.

You asked about the general emplo yment level and I'm informed by my dep artment that, because we don't really have a ver y large inde pendent capacity in Manitoba to generate stats, what we have is taken from the Stats Canada figures and that, si nce No vember to the end of March, the sea sonally adj usted emplo yment figures are 460, 000 for No vember and 464, 000 in March. Within that I realize that there are people being laid off and being emplo yed elsewhere and there are shifts between sectors, but in the macro sense that's the situation.

I also have a list, whether it's a comple te list I wou ldn't say, but it is a par tial list, at any rate, of new com pan ies that have opened up here in the last cou ple of months. I did refer to 3M of Mor den; Phillips Paints is about to be opened; two health produ cts firms, Vita Health and B.C. Nor th; and we've just heard that Fisons-Western Peat has accepted a OREE offer to locate here.

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 MR. cl4AIRMAN: The Member for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN (El mwood): Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a few remarks in respons e to the Member for Lake side. He obviously speaks from his constituency perspec tive as well as a Manitoban and so do I. I want to point out a: concern or two that I have, as a person who resides in the City of Winnip eg, and contrast it with the Member for Lakeside who is inter ested in ari A lcan plant in his own riding which would, of course, benefit the people in the area, but I believe that one has to also have some concern for the envir onment.

I think that all Manitobans, or the vast major ity, would like to see industrial development and examples like the Alcan plant locate in Manitoba. We need the jobs; we need the economic stimulation; we need the investment and I think that nobody is, in princi ple, op posed to this par ticular plant. The Minis ter will have her studies, Al can wiil have theirs and the two can come together and then they can be com par ed and contrasted, etc.

The Member for Lake side seems to hint or suggest, whether he do es so consciously or no t, about allow ing the Corpora tion to conclude its studies and so on and I don't think there should be any concern about that. I don't think it's the govern ment's role to allow them or prevent them from concluding their studies. I assume that they have the right to do so, and are doing so, and will do so, and I think the Minister has confirmed that, so there is no gover nment interfer ence in terms, of a pri vate corpora tion attempting to do some feasibility studies in regard to the location of an industry.

I think the other question is the environmental one and I don't kno w whether the Member for Lake side, or whether his political colleagues, seriously enough investigated that op portu nity, that concern , in regard to their haste of concluding an agreement for the purpose of winning re-election which is a legitimate co ncern of a political par ty but one that is, I think, of some conc ern to the citizens of the pro vince.

My con cern as a Winnip egger is, first of all, general po llution in the pro vince and, in parti cular, the fact that it has been stated on more than one occa sion that the pr e vailing winds in Manitoba tend to blow from that area onto the City of Winnipeg. This is something that cannot be lightly dismissed or examined. Well, the member says, it's not true.

Is the member suggesting that there is no effect? -(l nterjec tion) Well, I have also heard that if the plant is located in that par ticular area there is a real possibi lity or an ongoi ng tendency for the pollution from that area to blow direcily into the City of Winnip eg. I recall very well, as I'm sure many other people do, that when you had the Mount St. Helene explosion in Or egon, that we had par ticles coming from 2,0 00 miles away. - (I nterjection)- Well, you don't stop it, do you? You absorb it.

The point is that I simp ly say that if you can have a str eam oY volca'ri'i'c ash or cl'ust blowing 2,0 '00 miles away you can certainly have pol lution from an alumi num smelter blowi ng 30 miles away. Well, I'm simp ly saying, Mr . Chairman, it is a concern of mine, as a resident of this city, that if there is going to be a couple of tons of par ticles a day coming out of a smelter -(I nterjection)- Well, one to two tons? Mr.

Chair- man, I have read the newpaper accou nts and if we are getting pol lution of that order and it can or will blow over the City of Winnip eg, a metropolitan area of some 600, 000 peopl e, then that is a serious concern. I don't believe, for a moment, that the Prog ressive Con servative administration seriously looked at that pr ob lem. They were so anxious to conclude an agreement prior to the election that they wer e willing to simply dismiss that par ticular issue.

I say that any govern ment that concludes an agreement in regard to an aluminum smelter in the close pr ox imity of the City of Winnip eg is going to have to assure and ensure that there is not a continuous ongoing stream of po llution that will adverse ly affect the environment. I don't believe the Op po sition did that, and I believe that is a respo nsibility of this Minister and the Minister of the Environment. NIA. CHAI RMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. BLAKE: I'll defer to the Member of Lake side, it's on the same topic. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Lake side. MR.

ENNS: Perso nally I don't think this is the foru m to get into that kind of a debate and I didn't attempt to bri ng in that debate. I'm pleased to note from the Minister that Alcan will in fact be allowed to carr y on with the feasibility studies. The Member for Elmwood says, why allowed? Well, Mr. Chairman, a govern ment that doesn't allow a g over nment to carr y on it's adver tising pr ogr am and gets in a big foofaraw about that. I think it's a legitimate question for an Opposition member to ask is to please let them get along with their $4 to $5 million feasibility study.

I don't care what the gover nment is doing. Well, Mr . Chairman, that was the point that I'm mak ing. I'm satisfied with the answer from the Minister. I suggest that this is not the foru m to get into the kind of debate the Honou rable Member for Elmwood wants to get into a debate in. That's what I would like to have under way in terms of environmental studies. In fact, Mr . Chairman, they would be underway right about now. Those dates were established for April in Stonewall, in Teulon, and they are being delayed. I'm satisfied and accept the Ministers answers that they will be pr oceeded with.

I'm encour aging her and her department to see that in fact is being done. The Minister has answered me and I'm satisfied with those answers, Mr . Chairman. Now I'll raise a bit of hell on Health. 1652 oeM R. CHAIRMAN: I believe this area has been covered in great depth in pre vious days. I think we shou ld pr oceed with the Or der s that are in the books now. The Member for Minnedosa. MR. BLAKE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair man.

Unf ortunately, when we have two Committees going such as we have, it's a little difficult to try and cover them both and I may be touching on some ground that has been covered by the Minister but Mr. Chairman, if yo u'll bear with me. I have to make some remarks on the plant that of

Tuesday, 20 Apr il, 1982 cou rse near and dear to my heart, and that is I refer to the Mohawk Ethyl Alcohol Prod uction in Minnedosa. I think here, Mr . Chairman, is an ideal, a showcase pr ogr am for the Minister, and not to be unkindl y, a chance to put her money where her mouth is, in a further develop ment of the Mo hawk In dustry in Min nedosa. Her e is a first for Canada. It's the first plant to pr od uce ethyl alcohol in Canada and incorpor ate it with gasoline and sell gasohol. It 's an emplo yee Canadian-owned company. It qualif ies under all the parame ters that the Minister has mentioned up to now.

They'r e excellent corpo rate citizens. They have donated substantial funds to the various spor ts facili ties and educational facilities in the Town of Minne dosa. They have 25 to 30 emplo yees. The pr oduc t has been extremely well received . There's plans underway now to extend a service facility in Br andon, a fairly substantial service facility, to distribute their pr oduct in Br andon. They'r e in the pr ocess of building a service facility in Minnedosa, it should be open in another month or two to pro vide the peo ple in that area with the gasohol produ ct, Por tage la Prairie.

I just can't put my hand on the number of outlets that they will be open ing to allow the peo ple of Manitoba to have this parti cular product. But here's a case where we had a distillery op ened in late '60s, closed under the fo rmer NOP administration, endea vored to be opened, closed again, and eventually closed for good . There were other attempts made wher e local citizens put up about half-a-million dol lars and blew it down the tube; they weren't able to get it off the ground.

All of a sudden, there was the idea of pr oducing an ethyl alcohol that maybe could be used with the energy crisis coming to a bit of a crunch the way it was. Here was a govern ment, interested and trying to encour age industry to come to our pr ovince and pr o vide jobs that pr ovided some small incentive that may be enough to encou rage a plant to come.

It encour aged Moha wk to come and take a look at that defu net distillery that had a lot of the facilities that they req uired to produce their product, and through some negotiations and some assistance and research study by the govern ment in power of that time, a deal was made to bri ng the two parties together and a sale was consummated and that plant as I say is now open and pr oviding an excellent product. It's such an exciting development, Mr . Chairman. Ther e are meetings going on right now on further researc h. The Minister, I was a bit disturbed to hear her say last night that they were using barley.

I can't see anything wrong with it because the barley is pr o duced in our area and the farmer s delivering that barley are very, very appr eciative of that market. The pr oduct, there is no waste at all on that prod uct. The meal is being dehyd rated and trucked back to a dis tributor and it's going into the feed market, wher eas other cases - we mentioned alfalfa, it's a feed also - and I under stand one of the biggest markets in the alfalfa industry today is prod ucing kitty litter and I don't really think that's doing much to help a starving nation. It may help the environment and help the kit ties.

But these outlets are going to pro vide consider a ble emplo yment. The extension that could be made to this plant; the plant is there; it's oper ating; I think there's an oppor tunity here to pro vide a research facil- 1653 ity for the rest of Canada, in the research of cellulose, corn stoc k, straw or whatever it may be. I don't kno w how many million of dollars this is going to take but the facility is there now prod ucing one pr oduct. The territ or y is there, they req uire no more site plant loca tion.

Ther e's a large, large warehouse building there thet would house any additional facilities that they might need to put in this resea rch plant that wou ld develop the cellulose or the various other pr oducts that they may be trying, whether it be sugar beets, potatoes, or whatever. Ther e's a terrible amount of research going on, I kno w. In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, the company itself are look ing at the greenhouse possibi lities to use the escaping steam and whatnot for heat pur poses that is now being wasted.

I kno w other people have suggested that they were interested but the company are interested themselves. That's extr emely encourag ing because that is another development and a by- prod uct that's going to pro vide employment and pr ovide another pr oduct to the food market. In addition to that, as you kno w, we're the trout farm ing capital of Canada for rainbow trout in our area.

Ther e's a group interested now in maybe estab lishing a fish hatchery using some of the water that once it is used it escapes in a plant in a warm or heated form ; there's studies going on no w to maybe use that for a fish-hatchery type of opera tion. As I say, while it may not sound like much we marketed almost of a half-a-million fish from our area last year. That's not pounds, that's the small rainbow trout that you enjoy so much in the eating establishments throughout the pr ovince and elsewhere today. But that par ticular op eration, Mr .

Chair man, through you to the Madam Minister, is an ideal situation wher e govern ment incentives can work with industry and it follows all the parame ters and the guidelines that the Minister has outlined that her par ticular par ty phi losophy and her philo sophy is conduci ve to. It's a Canadian-owned company. The emplo yees get all the profits and the benefits or they'r e plowed back into the industry. I think here is an oppor tunity for th is government to follow up on the initiatives and the direction started by the last govern ment in getting that plant established.

I kno w that she and her deparment will reve ive 10 0 or 12 0 percent co-oper ation from the residents and the people in Minnedosa area. Getting that out, Mr . Chairman, I know that area had been covered befo re but I just wanted to get that on the record that we feel it's an exciting development and can be developed further and I know that will be looked on with favo ur because it meets all the guidelines laid down by the Minister on how ind ustry should be develo ped in the pr ovince. Mr .

Chair man, another area that concerns us -a nd I know being city-based I supp ose we could say with no der ogatory reference to the Minister - that the impor tance of industry such as the potash mine in western Manitoba, I don't think you can emp hasize how impor tant that is to the people in that area. Their expecta tions were aroused with the possibi lity of that plant being developed. They have been somewhat dampened down and I just hop e that they can be aroused again because the spin- off effect and the economic activity that that plant would create in our part of the pro vince just can't be overlooked.

We need

Tuesday, 20 Apr il, 1982 a stimulus out there to pr ov ide jobs and pro vide some secondar y employment to maybe a sagging agricul tural eco nomy. That is extre mely important to us and I urge the Minister to urge her colleagues to proceed with ali haste in trying to encou rage the agreement to a conclusion to pr ovide that plant and the emplo y ment oppor tunities that are so necessary for our you ng peo ple in that area. Of real concern of cou rse, Mr.

Chairman, is the abandoned air base at Rivers. i know that the Minister may not have too many answers, but I wou id like her tb comment and let us kno w what she fo resees with that par ticular plant and what future she could see in developing that base for the benefit of the Town of Rivers and the surrounding area. MRS. slliliTH: One of the things that I enjoy about Economic Development is that when you talk to a person from a spe cific area, there is a great deal of enthusiasm and a great range of ideas about possi bili ties. I think that spi rit of hope and innovation and op timism is very valuable.

I compli ment the member for exp ressing that because in a way in miccr ocosm, you are identifying the kind of spi rit that you find in most of our small co mn;iunities. Now there's a mixture of a range of ideas, some frustrations, some things that are going along well and spec ulation about what could be made to go better in the future. It's that kind of attitude that is really going to take us somewhere. Now I appr eciated hearing more about the Ethyl Alcohol Plant in Minnedosa.

I think, faced with the kind of prici ng for trad itional and deple table sources of energy, specific ally the oil, we're going to need all the innovation and experi mentation that we can mus ter in order to meet our pr oblems in the future. Ther e is no contr adiction between supp orting that type of activity along with the type of pr oject that Canartech are propo sing with their use of poplar pulp to develop gasahol.

I guess if we ended up having to choose between one or the other, we might have to look at what was the best land use and some further cost benefit, but I don't think we are at that point right now. I think more the attitude of; let a thousand flower s bloom and work out over time which are the most successful and effective. With regard to the Moha wk Plant, many of the eco nomic prog rams that have existed in our depar tment have depended on initiative taken by the pri vate com pany to come and ask for assistance.

There hasn't been a great deal of emp hasis on initiative taken by govern ment to go out and say, do you want us to help you expand? Ther e has been some, but the empha sis has been more on a reactive stance.

However, I thank the member fo r identifying an area where we can look further because we intend, as we build our human resources in the dep artment. to take a more initiating role, so I can assure you that we will look into - I don't know whether Mo hawk is looki ng at expansion or just what the future of that industry is - but I can assure ybli ttiat we ttiirik it's qui te cbrripatitile with other renewable energy initiatives that we are already taking. You mentioned the possi bility of greenhouses to use waste heat. The pos sibilities there are really enormous.

They can give us a capacity, not only to use waste heat on pip elines and so on or on big public buildings, there is also oppor tunity for pa rt-time rather interesting jobs. Ther e is possibility of building our own capacity to produce some of our food . Cur rently, I guess, throughout Canada we have shifted to importing a large percentage of our food pr oducts and the argument has always been, well, it's econom ically cheaper to buy from Florida or Californ ia than it is to produce in this par t of the world.

However, with the changing situation with regard to oil supply and oil cost, it's not unthinkable that in the future we are going to regret if we don't reverse that trend somewhat and try to diversify our food prod uc tion here in Manitoba and here in Canada. So although this isn't - maybe I am ju mping over a bit into the area of agriculture - it does come under the umbrella of general Econ omic Development and as you can tell, it's an area in which I have considerable enthusiasm. I have no pr ograms to repor t in that field at the moment, but it certainly is an area that we will look into seriously.

He also mentioned the trout farm ing and again, I guess, that's over in another Minister's area, but it's another example of the kind of diversification that can occur in areas that we used to think of as having just one form of economic activity. I would hope that we don't rely only on our pr imary reso urce deve lopmen t. It's been up front and centre of cou rse in Manitoba and most of Canada, but we also want to explore the pr ocessing of these pr oducts as well.

Seeing that there has been quite an increase of interest in pr o cessing fish, either by freezing - weli, I guess fr eez ing is the main - but also pr ocessing it in a way where there is more variety of p resentation to the consumer; packag ing, coating with different breads and so on. Our Tech Centr e, the Food Products Centre in Por tage la Prairie has been qu ite active in helping differ ent group s to impr ove their product and make it more mark etable. You mentioned the potash mine. I agree about the excitement that surrounds the rumour of the op ening of a new mine.

I grew up ih mining towns and I guess in areas wher e one mineral has been fo und, there is always the hope of other deposit s nearby and of expansion or development of a new industry, but it's a long path from the first geological work to the actual prod uction. The pace of those ki nds of developm ents has to do with the world pr icing, the world demand, the structure of the industry in terms of the numbers of companies involved, whether or not they tend to work as a bit of a cartel, or whether they oper ate independently and I think all those factors are rele vant to the potash development.

As you know we wer e somewhat critical of the per cent of public owner ship and therefore a takeout from the early propos als in dealing with IM C. Once again, the lead Minister wor king on this is the Minister of Energy and Mines and I'm sure when his Estimates are up he'll be more than happy to give you all the detail. 1654 MR. CHAI RMAN: The hour is 4:3 0, we interru pt pr o ceedings for Pr ivate Members' Hour . Committee rise SU PPLY -HEAL TH MR. CHAI RMAN, Jerry T. Storie (Flin Flon): The

Tuesday, 20 April, 1982 meeting will come to order. Continuing with the Health Estimates on page 73, Item No. 3. (b)(1 ) Salaries. The Honour able Member for For t Garry. MR. L. R. (Bud) SHERM AN (Fort Garry): Mr. Chair man, I wonder if the Minister could advise the Com mittee of the structure of this par ticular branch of the depar tment now and comment on the way in which it is functioning. It is the outcome, or the outgrowth, of the division of the two dep artments of Health and Com munity Services from their original unitary struc ture as it relates to the regional field service delivery system.

Cer tainly it was the ambitions of the pr evious administration to maintain the integrity of the single unit delivery system. For the past two-a nd-a-half years, in fact since November of 19 79, the regional system has been oper ating as a single unit serving both depar tments. Now in the past year further refinement was under taken with respect to that parti cular component.

Again one of the prim ary objectives was to maintain the integrity of single unit delivery, but there had been some recog nized difficulties and shortcomings in the repor ting structu re - in lines of respo nsibility struc ture, in lines of author ity, in lines of co mmunication and pla nning - and as a conseq uence a considerable and lengthy effort was made to refine that component in such a way as to maintain its form as a single unit system but split out regional community services from regional health services and introd uce a slightly differe nt line of structur e and administrative forma tion that maintained a type Of special ization and sepa ration between the two.

The intention was of course to continue with the same forma t of Regional Directors, and indeed, with the same Regional Directors who wer e in place at that time it was also the intention of all concerned to pr e serve the authority of those Regional Directors over conduct of the Personal Servi ces, both in Health and Community Ser vices administered under their offi ces. But some refinement was necessary in order to find the lines of repor ting and co mmunication and respo nsibility more clearly.

I think consider ation was given to establishment of a new position that would oversee the Perso nal Services oper ations with respect to all the regions and through which repor ting would be conducted on two channels; one into the senior administrative ranks of Health; and one into the senior administrative ranks of the Com munity Services depar tment. I'd ask the Minister if he could bri ng me and the Committee up-to-date on the results of that exercise par ticularly, Mr . Chair man, in view of the fact that this is the first year in which the actual pri nted Estimates have been broken out this way.

Regional Perso nal Servi ces used to appear in their entirety under Com munity Servi ces and now a very substantial amount of that appropria tion ap pears under the Estimates of the Depar tment of Health. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr . Chairman, yes, there's been very little change. There hasn't been any change at all as far as the direction, and trying to have the single delivery. My honour able fr iend is absolutely right, the former Regional Di rector of the Winnip eg region has 1655 been now placed in the new po sition of Exec utive Director, in charge of all the regions.

At the moment he is also the Regional Dir ector of the Winnip eg region. That will change fairly soo n. We are advertis ing for the position now. The delivery team works exactly the way it did befor e under the direction of the Regional Director s who are all within this branch in our depar tment. These pe ople ha ve a responsibility to our ADM, Mr . Mclean, for the services that we deliver and also they repor t directly to the Deput y Minister of Co mmunity Servic es for the service delivered by this depar tment but they work the same as a team.

Now the change we've done, I guess, is beef up the service to always try to impr ove it and at this time there is no intention of changing anything. In 19 78-79 as a result of the restraint program of the pre vious government - I believe there were about 88.5 posi tions that were cut off and a total of 33 po sitions were eventually returned during the last three years. No w, we're propo sing and we're asking for the money to add 20 staff man year s for direct field services in the Depar tment of Health and also 20 staff man yea rs in the Depar tment of Community Services and Co rr ec tions.

Although I don't kno w of anything else, the delivery of the services, the same, we want to review that, we want to look espe cially at the public health nursing part of it and pr evention and so on and this is something that we will review every year. MR. SHERM AN: Mr .

Chairman, there was some care taken at the time to pr otect the poss ible vulnerability of the morale of the Regional Directors who have served our pro vince and our system so loyally and so well, beca use there was change and because a move into relatively uncharted waters and nobody kne w prec isely how it was going to work out or who se respo nsibilities might be somewhat effected . Ther e was qu ite legitimately and quite understandably, concern among some of the senior officials of the depar tment for the morale of individual Regi onal Directors.

Whether the individ ual regional director s ever expr essed such concerns, I would not com ment at this juncture. But, I kno w that some of the senior pe rso nnel including Mr . Don Mcle an, including Mr . Bill Wer beniuk and including Mr . Frank Maynard all of whom are sitting in front of the Minister at the present time, did conv ey to the Minister of the day, namely myself, that obviously this was a consideration that had to be kept in mind and the suggestion was per fectly valid.

I wonder if the Minister could reassure the Com mittee that the Regional Directo rs are happy under the new structure or whether he has encoun tered any difficulties? MR. DESJARDINS: Mr . Chair man, I haven't heard any complai nts at all. We're satisfied with the action taken by the former Minister and we propose no change, certainly not at this time. MR. SHERM AN: Mr . Chairman, I w

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-37a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 37a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a1d7a91cf5dd4ea3326e94d63194a28291dcdf81

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