Manitoba Hansard — 5 October 1988 (Sitting 51, 34th Legislature, 1st Session)

34-1-51

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 First Session - Thirty-Fourth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 37 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XXXVII No. 51 -1:30 p.m., WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1988. ISSN 0542 - 5492 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba

MAN!TO�A L.E:GISlATIVI; A$$EMBLY Th.irty�Fc;nuth !..�Qi�l�tYrE! Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME CONSTITUE NCY PARTY ALCOCK, Reg Osborne LIBERAL ANGUS, John St. Nor bert LIBERAL ASHTON, Steve Thompson NDP BURR-=1,.1.., Parker Swan River PC CARR, J�Q�es Fort Rouge LIBERAL CARSTAIRS, Sharon River Heights LIBERAL CHARLES, Gwen Selkirk LIBERA L CHEEMA, Gulzar Kildonan LIBERAL CHORNOPYSKI, Willi am Burrows LIBERAL CONNERY, Edward Hon. Portage la Prairie PC COWAN, Jay Churchill NDP CUMMIItfGS, Glen, Hon. Ste. Rose du Lac PC DERKACH, Leonard, Hon.

Roblin-Russell PC DOER, Gary Concordia NDP DOWNEY, James Hon. Arthur PC DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. Emerson PC � DRIEDGER, Herold, L. Niakwa LIBERAL DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. Aiel PC EDWARDS, Paul St. James LIBERAL ENNS, Harry Lakeside PC ERNST, Jim, Hon. Charleswood PC EVANS, Laurie Fort Garry LIBERAL EVANS, Leonard Brandon East NDP FILMON, Gary, Hon. Tuxedo PC FINDLAY, Glen Hon. Virden PC G�UDRY, Neil St. Boniface LIBERAL GILL-=.SHAMMER, Harold Minnedosa PC GRAY, Avis Ell ice LIBERAL HAMMOND, Gerrie Kirkfield Park PC HARAPIAK, Harry The Pas ND P HARPER, Elijah Rupertsland NDP HELWER, Edward R.

Gimli PC HEMPHILL, Maureen Logan NDP KOZAI(, Richard, J. Transcona LIBERAL LAMOUREUX, Kevin, M. lnkster LIBERAL MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood NDP MANDRAKE, Ed Assiniboia LIBERAL MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. Morris PC McCRAE, James Hon. Brandon West PC MINENKO, Mark Seven Oaks LIBERAL MITCHEl.SON, Bonnie, Hon. River East PC ltfEUFELD, Harold, Hon. Rossmere PC OLESON, Charlotte Hon. Glad stone PC ORCHARD, Donald Hon. Pembina PC PANKRATZ, Helmut La Verendrye PC PATT ERSON, Allan Radisson LIBERAL PENNER, Jack, Hon. Rhineland PC PLOHM�Itf, John Dauphin NDP PRAZNIK, Darren Lac du Bonnet PC ROCAN, Denis, Hon.

Turtle Mountain PC ROCH, Gilles Springfield LIBERAL ROSE, Bob St. Vital LIBERAL STORIE, Jerry Flin Flon NDP TAYLOR, Harold Wolseley LIBERAL URUSKI, Bill lnterlake NDP WASYLYCIA-LEIS, Judy St. Johns NDP YEO, lva Sturgeon Creek LIBERAL

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, October 5, 1988. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Twenty- Third Annua l Report of the Manitoba Hog Producers' Marketing Board for the year 1987. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS - Mr. Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I would like to direct Honourable Members' attention to the Speaker's gall ery where we have with us this afternoon a trade delegation from the Ukraine including the Minister of Finance, lvan 0.

Z8brodin, of the Ukraine Parliament and other prominent business leaders. On behalf of all Hono urable Mem bers, we welcome you here this afternoon, gentlem en . We also have with us here this afternoon Mr. Vlnkatesh Kaveath and Mr. Balakrishna T. These gentlemen are on an international tour which began in 1987 to create international friendsh ip and bring to our attention drug abuse. So far, they have travelled to Europe, the Middle East, North Africa and the United States of America and hope to be back in their native country, which is India, by January 1989.

On behalf of all Hon ourable Mem bers, we welcome you here this afternoon . *

(1335) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Raffe rty-Aiameda Project Land Irrigation Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Penner). The Rafferty-Aiameda project as originally proposed was to have two reservoirs which will consume some 20,800 acres of land for that purpose, hopefully, water retention. The project also as originally proposed would have irrigated some 12, 000 acres of farm land.

Now we find in this last week that ther e are concerns being raised in Saskatchewan that there will be problems in filling those dams, there will be water qual ity problems in those dams, and that only 2,0 00 acres of farm land will be potentially the beneficiary of this massive project. My question is, when is this Governm ent going to come out of the closet on this project which will be detrimental to Manitoba and admit tha t it is only really a polit ical boondoggle for the Premier and Deputy Premier of Saskatchewan, and that the province or the feds have gained their Grasslands National Park?

Let us have some clear statements from the Minister on this. Hon.

Jack Penner (Minister of Natural Resources): lt is interesting that the Honour able Member from across the Cham ber here indic ates now that the irrigation of 2,000 acres of land instead of 12, 000 acres will be again detrimental to Manitoba. lt appears to me that the questions raised before by the Honour able Mem bers from the liberal Party indicated that one of the main reasons why the scare tactics that they were using to indicate to Manitobans that the quality of water that they were so afraid of coming out of the dam could be as a result of the major irrigation project that was being initiated and run-offs from that irrigation system back into the Souris River.

Now it appears to me that they have had a change of heart and they are now worried that we will have not have the economic benefit in Saskatchewan, that we should pay attention to and negotiate on behalf of Saskatchewan people to make sure that they will have the benefit of 12 ,000 irrigation acres. Is that what he is saying? Souris River Management Plan Mr. Speaker: The Ho nourable Member for Wolsele y, with a suppleme ntary question. Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): I wish we could call him the Minister of facts and knowledge, but unfortunately we cannot. · The Minister of Natu ral Resources (Mr.

Penner) says in today's newspaper that after the project is built a systems approach to Souris River management is essential , particularly to guarantee water qual ity. The quest ion is, how do es the Mi ni ster exp lain the incongruity, the inconsistency and the ignor ance he displays when he refuses to support a systems approach to get sufficient level of knowledge complete with environmental impact assessment at this stage of the project? That is hypocrisy. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would ask the Honourable Member for Wolseley to withdraw the word "hypocrisy." Mr.

Taylor: I will remove that expressi on, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker: Thank you very much. Mr. Taylor: The facts speak for themselves. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Wolsel ey, complete withdrawal. Mr. Taylor: Pardon me? Mr. Speaker: Complete withdrawal. 1894

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 Mr. Taylor: I withdraw the comment. Mr. Speaker: Thank you very much. Hon. Jack Penner (Minister of Natural Resources): As I have indicated before, there has been a three party or a five-party approach basically to the whole project. That five-party group is going to meet towards the end of this month. The Saskatche wan Go ve rnment, the Ma nitoba Government and Ottawa met last week to discuss a further approach to the water quality and the water quantity.

Out of those discussions came an agree ment with Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ottawa that there would be a water quality monitoring board established. There would also be a management plan of the total Souris River Basin put in place once in operat ion, which would have the ability to flow waters and monitor quality. I should indicate to the Mem ber opposite that he in fact has indicated continually that, because of the warming effect of the Shand Power Station, there will be water deterioration when there will be no water pumped into the basin- *

(1340) Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honou rable Member for Wolsel ey, with a supple mentary question. Mr. Taylor: He was not listen ing. Mr. Speaker, the point was, there will be less water which means warmer water. The Minister has preposterously talked of more water, better quality water, and yet Minot just put a half a milli on dollars extra into the project to partially mitigate against deteriora tion of water qualit y.

The question is, when will this Minister come to grips with the fact that he has absolutely no assurances of water quality at this time because he cannot refer to the missing environmental impact assessment, because he cannot refer to the draft U.S. Agreement, which they will not give us, and because of the toothless- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Penner: Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, there will be a water quality monitoring board establis hed which will have the authority to indic ate to the management authority of the Souris River Basin that flows should be changed.

There will be two or three outlets on the dam which will allow different qualities of water to be flowed out of the dam. There will be a total management system put in place which will allo w for the very close monitoring and assurances of water quality down the Souris River. There will also be an increased flow of water during periods of time when we have no assurances at all now, which will be beneficial to the Souris Valley residents who are so dependent on a continual and average flow of water down that Souris River. Some Honourable Members: Hear, hear!

Environment Ministers' Meeting PCBs Air Transportation Mr. Speaker: The Honour able Member for Wolsel ey, with a new question. Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, would that I were so assured. A new question to the Fi rst Minister (Mr. Filmon), at this moment ther e is a mee ting of all Canadian Environment and Na tural Resources Ministers going on here in Winnipeg. One of the main items on their agenda is the proble ms with polychlorinated biphenyls, the infamous PCBs. The Minister of the Environ ment (Mr. Connery) in a press statement the other day indicated a concern about air shipments of PCBs.

My question to the First Minister, does he yet have any information on the question I raised last week in the House as to dangerous goods transp ortation permits, an export permit? Is he aware and would he like to make comment on the fact t.hat the military can give � no assurance whatsoever as to the additional and � special training of their staff in the packaging, handling and transporta tion of those goods? They did not have it. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Clearly, the Member should recall that he did not ask that question of me.

Had I taken it as notice, I would undoubtedly have had the information for tod ay. That information was taken as notice by another Minister and I invite him to ask that other Minister for the information when he is here in the House. PCB Disposal Government Policy Mr.Harold Taylor (Wolaeley): A supplemental question, is it now the policy of the Filmon Government that it is not concerned with the destruction of Manitoba's PCBs in that we only have 2 percent of the national total and, if not, will he refute the position, that very position taken by his Environment Minister (Mr.

Connery) yesterday and clarify what is the position of the Filmon Government on the destruction of PCBs? *

(1345) Hon. Gary Fil..-on (Pr emier): Mr. Speaker, clearly our Government is very concerned to ensure that the PCBs that are here in Manitoba, that have been here in Manitoba for decades, are being properly handled and are being stored in an absol utely safe manner so that when there is a method of safe disposal available for them that method will be utilized to ensure that they are disp osed of for the safety and benefit of all Manitobans. There is no question tha t we are doing our

part in obtai ning the absolute assurance. We have ensured that the environ mental officials of this province are checking and rechecking all of the storage spaces, all of the items on the list of the federal Government in their jurisdiction, all of the known sites for PCBs under 1895

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 our jurisdiction, to ensure that they are being stored in an absolutely safe manner. When we have available to us-a nd I might indicate to him, as he should know, that there is not a known method of safe disposal yet for some of the high-level concentrated PCBs. When that is made available to us, we will be destroying those PCBs in an environmentally safe and sound manner. Federal Assistance Mr. Speaker: The Honour able Member for Wolsel ey, with a final supplement ary question. Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr.

Speaker, given that thing about safe destruction method, there are safe destruction methods available and the question is, is the federal Minister of Environment, McMillan, offering Manitoba and the other provinces any assistance on the destruction of PCBs, as was repeatedly given as assurances that there would be assistance from the federal Government, or are we just going to live with the kiss-off that the Mulroney Government gave us on PCB destruction in recent weeks? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I recall sitting here in the Hous e when the Min ister of Environment (Mr.

Connery) responded to that same question to the Member for Wolseley (Mr. Taylor). Perhaps he would like to read it again in Hansard. Wh at he said was that the fed eral Min ister of Environment had initiated the purchase of portable PCB destruction facilities for the low-level concentrate PCBs. The reason that he was going to portable facilities was so tha t they could be moved from place to pla ce, from province to province across the country.

Ultimately, Manitoba would have the availabili ty of that equipment so tha t it would come to Manitoba and the available PCBs that could be destroyed by that particular method, because not all of them -s ome of them are low-level concentrates, so they would be able to be destroyed by that portable machine. Others would not be able to be destroyed. We would be a part of that program because we want to handle them in a safe manner and ensure that we destroy them. Rafferty-Aiameda Project Technical Committee Report Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Oppo sition): My qu estion is to the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Penner). lt follows upon the advice of the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to read Hans ard.

I have reviewed Hansard over the last day in terms of the Rafferty-Aiameda Dam, and it confirms my opinion in writing that the Minister of Natural Resources has stated on one day that he was going to have a Technical Committee Report and table it in this Legislature; on another day, he says he is going to have a negotia ting committee working with the Americans and Saskatchewan authorities; and on the third day he stated, and his Minister of Environment (Mr.

Connery) has stated , that indeed the Technical Committee will table a report-in fact, it was promised two weeks ago-a nd that would be the basis for having or not having an environme ntal impact study. I would ask the Minister of Na tural Resources (Mr. Penner) to tell Manitobans, indeed this House, is the Technical Committee completed because he is obviously negotiating? If that report is completed, will he please table it this minute in this House, as his Minister of the Environment (Mr. Connery) and he have promised the Members of this Legislature? Hon.

Jack Penner (Minister of Natural Resources): The Technical Committee Report will be tabled next Tuesday. Negotiations Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposi tion): I would ask the Minister of Natu ral Resources (Mr. Penner) how he could be negotiating with the federal Govern ment, the Saskatchewan Government, and the authorities in the United States, when he has stated before that his Technical Committee will not be a negotiating committee. lt will indeed be a Technical Committee that will report to this House.

How can he now acknowledge today in the newspaper that they are inde ed nego tiating an arrangement and an agreement? And would he not now agree that a federal environ mental impact study that will tell all Manitobans the facts is appropria te before he goes and cuts a deal like the Province of Saskatchewan has obviously done with the federal Govern ment? * ( 1350) Hon. Jack Penner (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, negotiations have been ongoing since I took office and they will be ongoing until we have reached an agreement. Mr. Doer: Mr.

Speaker, this Minister is going and negotiating a backroom agreement when he said clearly that a Technical Committee would be formed in this House. He is breaking his word to the people of Manitoba. There is no question about it. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. The Honour able Acting Government House Leader, on a point of order. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I would ask that you would call the Leader of the NDP (Mr. Doer) to attention. He is abusing the Ho use Rules. He kno ws, when he pr ovi des a supple mentary question, there is supposed to be no

preamble. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Concordia, on the same point of order. Mr. Doer: I think, if you will review Hansard, you will clearly see that what I stated was within the Rules. Secondly, the statements I have made are clearly within the statements that the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Penner) has made in this House over the last two and-a-half weeks. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! 1896

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. May I remind all Honourable Members that a supplementary question does not require a pream ble, and yet may I also remind Honour able Ministers that answers to questions should be as brief as possible and should not provoke debate. Mr. Penner: Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, the Technical Committee that has been establi shed to review the documents that are in place to put together a report for this Leg islature will report next Tuesday, and negotiations have been and will go on for an agreem ent.

The report will be tabled that has been prepared by the Technical Committee. Federal Impact Study Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Concordia, with a.final supplement ary question. Mr. Gary Doar (Leader of the Second Oppo sition): I would ask the First Minister, is the Government reversing Its position that he articulated in this House on September 23 that the Technical Committee would report to this Legisla tive Chamber first, and then a decision would be made on the federal environ mental impact study?

Clearly today, the Minister said, we are not proceeding to have a federal environ mental impact study, which is the position they flip�flop back and forth on. Has the Government reversed its position and changed its mind on the Technical Committee leading into a federal environmental impact study? I would ask that from the First Minister. Hon. Jack Penner (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I do not know how much more clearer we can indicate, as we have, that when the Technical Committee would have had their report that we would table it in this House.

We have also indicated very clearly that if the Technic al Comm ittee will re quir e or recommend an impact study, then we will recommend and ask the federal Government to do an environmental impact study. Until that report is tabled, that decision will have to be pending. Tax Exemptions Punitive Measures Mr. Richard Kozak (Transcona): My question is for the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness). Mr. Speaker, it is time our tax system reflected Manitobans' deep concern about the environment.

I have in hand a Freon gas canister for boat horns. lt is readily available at hardware stores, and its label states it contains a chlorofluoro-carbon that may harm the public health and environment by reducing ozone in the upper atmosphere. Will this Gover nment initiate discussions with the federal Government to bring in a complete ban on the production and importation of similar products? In the interim, will this Minister discourage the use of this sort of garbage by introducing punitive taxes on such products? Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Firstly, with a specific answer to that question, I will defer to my colleague, the Minister in charge of the Environment (Mr. Cannery). With respect to this Government bringing forward punitive measures, we do not do those sorts of actions on a whim. I might say also tha t those are budgetary rrioves. They are made on the basis of a budgetary thrust. When it is decided to, so-called , make a punitive move, as close as we have come over the last years is with respect to leaded gasoline.

If the Memb er oppo site is asking for a precise action with respect to one item wi thin the field of taxation, I would have to say that we wo uld have to look at that very carefully because that would be precedent setting in itself, when the Government of the Day started to hit specific items in a punitive tax sense. Pollution Cleanup Fund Mr. Speaker: The Honour able Member for Transcona (Mr. Kozak), with a supplementa ry question. Mr.

Richard Kozak (Transcona): A supplement ary for� the Minister, Ontario, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island are lead ing a push for a billion dollar national poll ution cleanup fund financed by new federal taxes on polluting firms. Will this Government join the majority of provinces in urging the federal Govern ment to tax poll uters and make pollution a non-paying option? Hon.

Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): The other day when I was in conv er sat ion with the Honour able Member, who showed me the tax guides that I had distributed to all Members of this House, and where exem ptions were shown for th ose firms who out of their own decisions, on the basis of their own decisions, were providing for a cleaner environment, where some tax exem ptions were allo wed, I believe this is the genesis of the question. I would say in general we are prepared to see what other jurisdictions are doing.

My officials are constantly looking across all taxation jurisdictions in Canada and indeed, if it is meritorious in that sense after we have had a full review, we will consider it. * (1 355) Tax Exemptions Pollution Control Equipment Mr. Richard Kozak (Transcona): A final suppleme ntary for the Minister, yesterday the Minister expressed some concern about the cost of joining the five other provinces that exempt pollution control equipment from sales tax. I believe today the Minister has softened his approach somewhat.

Is the Minister prepared now to acknowledge that the cost of not using the tax system to protect our environment, the health of our people and the future of our province is indeed prohibitive? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Let us be abundantly clear. My answer yesterday was in response to a specific question dealing with bringing in immediate tax measures. I prefer that the Member 1897

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 not twist the question to make it appear that we had a hard position. The Member yesterday asked that this Government bring in a measure tomorr ow in a taxation sense. I said that is not the way things are done. I never ever indicated this Government would not be prepared to look at the precise area that he was suggesting. Indeed it has on its own, so I am not in disagreement with the Member opposite.

What we are discussing is the time frame, specifically to take a precipitous action in one specific area in 24 hours notice is not the way tax measures are brought on by this Government and, I dare say, by all Governments in the land. Constitutional Accord Public Hearings Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): My question is to the Acting Minister responsible for Constitutional Affairs (Mr. Manness). We have had a growing number of ind ividuals and groups calling our offices ask ing ques tions about public hearings on the 19 87 Constitutional Accord.

I am wondering if it is the Government's intention to introduce the resol ution within the next seven days. Hon. Gary Filmon (Pr emier): I am sure that matter will be a topic of discussion by the House Leader (Mr. McCrae) with the other House Leaders when and if such a decision is made. Mr. Carr: There have been no discussions among House Leaders to date. So if indeed the question is to be put to the House within seven days, they better talk pretty quick.

My supple ment ary to the Acting Min ister of Constitutional Affairs is that we have had many inquiries from groups and individuals outside the Province of Manitoba who have indicated an inter est to express their opinion on this very important matter. Is it the Premier's view that subm issions should be accepted from all interested Canadians, regardless of where they live? Mr. Filmon: I have been accused of being autocratic with respect to imposing my will on matters that should more properly be the domain of the Cabinet or the caucus of the Government of Manitoba.

In this particular case, I have said very clearly, and again I refer the Member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Carr) to Hansard when he asked that same question in the past or a very similar question, that will be a judgment and a decision made by the committee of this Legislature, the All Party Committee with represe ntation from the Liberals, from the New Democrats, from the Prog ressive Conservatives, who will judge what are the rules and the terms of reference of that committee vis-a-vis ailowing people from within the province, people from outside the province.

I have said, and I have expressed this view over and over again, that I want this to be the most open and complete public hearings possi ble, so that those who have a role to play in providing information to the Members of this Legislature, to the public of Manitoba vis-a-vis the Meech Lake Accord and all of its potential ramifications, in effect, that those people should be heard. That is my position, but the ultimate decision on that matter will be made by the committee made up of all- Party representat ion in this House. * (14 00) Public Hearings Adertising Mr.

Jam es Carr (F ort Rouge): With a fina l supplementary to the Premier (Mr. Filmon), the Premier knows that the Clerk's Office has already taken the names of groups and individuals who would like to make presentations in front of the committee. lt seems a bit unfair though that the Government has made no public announcement that the Clerk's Office is doing this right now. lt has been traditional that the sooner you get you r name into the Clerk's Office the sooner you will be able to speak once the committee actually meets.

I wonder if the First Minister will commit today to buying advertising space in all of the media outlets in Manitoba so that all Manitobans, all Manitobans- An Honourable Member: Including ethnic papers. Mr. Carr: -i ncluding ethnic papers, so that Manitobans who are interested in making presentations can have the opportun ity to do so. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): What the Member is asking is for us to say to people that the Government of Manitoba and the Legislature of Manitoba will be holding public hearings at some point in time in the future, on some dates, in some unknown locations.

We would encourage everybody to put their names in so that they should appear perhaps somewhere, sometime, someho w before this committee. I suppose that he is asking for us to put those ads in the paper every day from now until the time that the committee sits. The Liberals have been absurd in the past, but this is the ultimate in absurdity to suggest that every day, day after day, day after day- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Filmon: -we put these ads in all the papers throughout the province and beyond because he wants rep resentation.

How about the Globe and Mail? Would you like La Presse? Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Clean Environment Hearings Ministerial Interference Mr. Harry Harapiak (The Pas): My question is for the Premier. Can the Premier tell this House if it is the policy of the Conservative Government that Ministers not discuss or intervene themselves in any case before 1898

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 a quasi-judicial body while that matter is before that body? Hon. Gary Filmon (Prem ier): Given that I know there is a punch line to this question, I would ask the Mem ber to tell me what his allega tion is and what involvement he has, what he calls a quasi-judicial body, and what is the nature of the matter behind it, and I will be happy to answer the question . Mr. Harapiak: My supplemen tary question is to the Premier (Mr. Filmon).

What action would the First Minister take if he found that one of his Ministers was interf ering with a quasi- jud icial body while it was before -and the body is the Clean Environ ment Commission . What action would the Premier take if he found a Minister was interfering with a body while it was holding hearings? Mr. Speak er: Ord er, pl ease . lt seems to me the Honour able Mem ber is ask ing an opinion of the Honour able First Minister, a hypothetical question, it seems to me. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please .

Would the Honou rable Member for The Pas kindly rephrase his question? Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speake r: Order , ple ase . I do no t think the Honour able Member for The Pas (Mr . Harapiak) can hear me. Would the Honourable Mem ber for The Pas kindly rephrase his question? Mr. Harapiak: What action would the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) take if one of his Ministers was interfering with a quasi-judicial body while the hearing was being held? Mr. Speaker : Ord er, plea se . For the Honour able Member for the Pas (Mr. Harapiak), his question is hypothetical.

He is asking the Honourable First Minister Uif." Order, please; order, please . Mr. Harapiak: Since the Minister would not tell us what the policy was, I was asking what action would he take against the Minister of Environment (Mr . Connery), who had discussed the case involving the Clean Environment Commis sion a day after the Clean Environment Commission had held hearings with McCain Foods in Portage la Prairie. lt was a case that comes under his jurisdiction and in his constituency. When will the Premier (Mr.

Filmon) take the Minister of Environment into the woodshed and deal with him so that he will not be having this political interference and intimidation of areas that come under his jurisdiction? Mr. Filmon: I recall when this Memb er for The Pas (Mr. Harapiak) was a Minister in the former Government that he intervened with the CEDF to ensure that they gave loans to friends of the Ne w Democratic Party, a former New Democratic Party Mem ber of this Legislature and a person who had provided the office space for the Member for Rupertsland's (Mr. Harper) election campaign.

He intervened personally to overrule the judgment of the CEDF board and to allow them and to impose upon them a loan to be given to these people. That is the kind of interference that I would not tole rate, Mr. Speaker, as Premier. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for The Pas. Order. I have recognized the Honourable Member for The Pas (Mr. Harapiak), with a final supple mentary question. Mr. Harapiak: Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear to me the First Minister (Mr.

Filmon) does not know the difference between a quasi-judicial body and other bodies that are involved with the running-w hat action is this Min ister going to take so we get a Min ister of Environment (Mr. Connery) who will quit intimidating � people and quit interfering with bodies that are charged � with the environment in the province? Mr. Filmon: I take that as a serious allegation and I am going to investigate it. But I want to tell you, I took it as a serious allega tion too when the Member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) and the Member for Thom pson (Mr.

Ashton) raised the issue of two members of staff in the Department of Labour who were presumably and I want to tell you that no grievance was laid by either of those staff members. They did not pursue that matter and they have not pursued that matter despite the fact it was raised in this Legislature by two separate Members of the ND P. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Before I recog nize the Hono urable Mem ber for Thom pson (Mr. Ashton), I would like to remind all Honour able Members that the Honour able Member for The Pas (Mr. Harapiak) did raise a very serious question.

The Honourable Fi rst Min ister (Mr . Filmon) was attempting to answer it. Order , plea se . The Honour able Mem ber for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), on a point of order. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thom pson): Mr. Speaker, the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) was not dealing with an answer to the Member's ques tion. He rais ed al lega tions regarding myself and the Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr. Doer).

If the First Minister would care to check the facts, he would find tha t the allegations I made were confirmed in signed affidavits and that action is still ongoing, negotia tions still ongoing between the union and the empl oyees and the- Mr. Speaker: Order. The Honour able Member does not have a point of order. Mr. Filmon: I have indicated that I am quite prepared to investigate the allegation put forth by the Member for The Pas (Mr. Harapiak). If he will provide me with 1899

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 the incident, with the people who have been contacted and were talked to by the Minister, I will investigate it and report back.- (Interjection)- No. He has made the allegation. Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Manitoba Hydro Rate Increase Mr. Herold Driedger (Niakwa): I will try to keep my questions free of argumentative debate like this. An Honourable Member: And we wish you well. *

(1410) Mr. Herold Driedger: I will try. My question is for the Mi nis ter of Energy and Mi nes (Mr . Neuf eld). All Manitobans are assured today, now that the Minister � has reinforced the concept of greater Crown corporation , accountabil ity as it was announced in the Throne Speech. lt is good now to know that the future Hydro rate increases will be brought before the Public Utilities Board . The past practices wher e Manitoba Hydro appeared before the PUB only once every eight to 10 years can hardly be called adequa te. Therefore, I applaud the actions of the Government.

However, I must ask and through you, Mr. Speaker, to.the Minister responsible for Hydro (Mr. Neuf eld), is this sufficient. We are told that rate increases will be necessary to build up reserves due to the drought. We do not know how much of such a rate increase may be attributable to the hasty construction of Limestone, that of building Limestone before it was actually needed by the Manitoba ratepayer. Will the Minister, in addition to the proposed rate increases, also authorize public hearings into Limestone as recommended by the Public Utilities Board? Hon.

Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): I think that is a question, Mr. Speaker, that might well be asked of the committee when it sits next Tuesday. Mr. Herold Driedger: I am trying to determine what that answer actually meant, Mr. Speaker.

Perhaps a pol icy decision on the part of the Minister with respect to suggesting very strongly that the Hydro Corporation present itself to the Public Utilities Board in order to have the total Li mestone story brought out into public, because Man itobans need to know whether the predictions of Hydro losses as reported in the media these past few months are correct or whether the predictions of the huge profits are correct. Obviously, the setting of rates is very dependent upon this kind of information. Mr. Neufeld: Mr. Speaker, those questions again might well be asked when the committee sits.

Any question you have can be asked at that time and I encourage the Member to come and ask them. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Upgrading Mr. Jerry Storie (Fiin Flon): I am a little reluctant, Mr. Speaker, to try and get this Minister to answer a question. Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting has been waiting for some months now for app roval for a modernization project. Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting emp lo ys 2, 300 peo ple dir ectly in th ree nor thern communities that has an impact on hundreds of other jobs across the province.

In fact, a week ago Monday, Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting held a meeting in Winnipeg with its suppl iers to indicate how serious the situation was with respect to the need for that upgrading and the need for the federal Government and the provincial Government to make a commitment to this project. Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): How much are they committing? Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, the Premier from his chair says, "Ho w much are they committing." lt is a sad fact that the Premier does not know. That commitment is in the hundreds of milli ons of dolla rs to Manitoba.

My question is to the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld). Will the Minister follo w through on the commitment of the previous Government to support this project, to put in the money? Will the Minister follo w the election commitment of the Premier to support this project? Will they announce today that they will support the modernization project so that we can get rid of the insecurity that is being felt by the hundreds of workers in the communities affected by HBMS activities? Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr.

Speaker, we as the Government are well aware of the cost involvement of the upgrading of the smelter at Flin Flon. We are aware that the people in Flin Flon and the workers indeed of the entire northern part of the province are very interested in the outcome of these negotiations. We are also aware, and the Mem ber for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) should be aware, that the company is pr esently negotiating with the federal Government which we are incidentally monitoring. When they make their announcement, we will make ours. Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Pollution Mr. Jerry Storie (Fiin Flon): Mr.

Speaker, I want the Minister to know that the public in Flin Aon is concerned about the need for modern ization. In fact, there have been two public meetings now. There will be a third public meeting this Thursday where hundreds of people will come out to express their concern over the pollution which is resulting from the lack of modern ization. Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister indicate whether he has contacted the fed eral Min isters resp onsible, whether he has indicated that the problem is twofold, the need for modernization for the productivity of the plant, and to keep the environment to protect the health 1900

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 of hundreds and hundreds of people who live in the immediate area? Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): The pollution did not start on April 26. We, as I have indicated, are very much aware of the problem in Flin Flon. We are also aware of the cost. The cost of $13 0 million cannot be negotiated in this House. Those negotiations are ongoing and we are monitoring them and, yes, we have been in contact with federal officials both at the political and the bureaucracy level. We will continue to monitor and we will report back to the House as soon as we come to a conclusion.

Mr. Speaker: The Honour able Mem ber for Flin Flon, with a final supplem entary question. Mr. Storie: The Minister of Energy and Mines is dead wrong when he says the pollution problems have not been worsening in the last six months. They certainly have because modernization is needed. Upgrading Mr. Jerry Storie (Fiin Flon): Mr. Speaker, my final question is to the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld). Will the Minister of Energy and Mines contact Mr.

Epp who has been ruminating in public about this deal and indicate that he should stop playing petty politics with this particular issue, an issue that affects hundreds and hundreds of lives, the security of working people in the Flin Flon area, in the Snow Lake, in the Leaf Rapids area? Will he contact Mr. Epp and ask him to ensure that this pr oject receive the serious consideration that it deserves and that we will get an announcement that the federal - Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): Well, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Epp hardly needs me to defend him in public.

What he has done for this province speaks for itself. We, as a Gover nment, and I personally have spoken to Mr. Epp, some of the Ministers, the Minister of Industry (Mr. Ernst) has spoken to Mr. Epp- and yes, we have, and we are monitoring it, and we are encouraging the federal Government to come to a conclusion on it. Ambulance Services Funding Mrs. Gwen Charles (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, every person serving the public receives from time to time calls which tug at the heart strings. Yesterday, a rural senior citizen called my of fice.

Her husband is ill and requires hospital treatment which in just one week required three trips into the city for hospital care. But because it was not necessary to admit him overnight, the bill becomes the responsibility of these senior citizens, a bill of well over $1 ,000 in just one week. I have been told by ambulance operators that this is not unique, that they are aware of senior citizens who go without food in order to pay such bills. My question is to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) who, in Opposi tion, asked this quest ion and who, as Minister, has avoided the answer.

My question is, when will the ambulance service in Manitoba be adequately funded? Hon. Donald Or cha rd (Minis ter of Healt h) : Mr. Speaker, the ambula nce service funding has been a subject of discussion in this House. Currently, it is a subject of some extensive review and I hope to be able to make favourable announcements in due course. An Honourable Member: lt seems fair. Mr. Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired. NON-PO LITICAL STATEMEN T Mrs. Gwen Charles (Selkirk): May I have leave to make a non-poli tical statement? Mr. Speaker: Does the Honourable Member for Selkirk (Mrs.

Charles) have leave to make a non-pol itical � statement? (Agreed) , Mrs. Charles: Earlier this week, Members of this Leg islature had the privilege of attending the opening of Na tional Family Week. I certainly support, as I am sure every Member here supports, the unity of every family. But there are many areas that we are responsible for in this House and as members of society. The family is seen as a romantic structure, but in realism it is not as st rong as it beh aves in the pictu res, in the advertisements and in the storybooks.

The family is not a dream world, but it is a dream concept. 1901 I urge all Members today to take all care in all the deli berations that we pay attention to the family unit and that we do everything to support the family. I urge the Members to support Family Week and recommend and commend to the federal Government their support of the family and to this Government for proclaiming National Family Week. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, I am wondering if you might call the Bills, debate on second readings, in the order that they are shown on the Order Paper, beginning with Bill Nos. 6 through No. 27. * ( 1420) HOUSE BUSIN ESS Mr. Jay Cowan (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a quest ion related to House Business to the Acting House Leader (Mr. Manness), it is the normal practice over the years to have Min isters present, and I am speaking in the generic sense so as not to offend the Rules with respect to the presence of any particular Minister or Member, but to have Ministers present when their Bills are being spoken to.

The reason for that practice is we believe that all Members of this House, whether they be in Oppos ition

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 or in Government, when speaking to Bills, are making substantive points and are providing good advice and asking impo rtant questions. For that reason, over a long number of years there has been an establ ished pattern that Ministers do make every effort to be here when their Bills are being spoken to. We have been very patient on this side with respect to the absence of Ministers during discussion on their. Bills. We have brought the matter up peripherally in the past, but I think now it is time to ask the question directly.

Is it anticipated that the Ministers for whom those Bills are brought forward will be in the House to hear our comments? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, as can be seen as we look at the Order Paper, the presenters of the Bills, the Minister for Environment (Mr. Connery), as is well known, is at the conference today. I am the Acting Attorney-General and I will certainly be here to listen to all the comments by Members opposite, and I will relay them in significant detail to the Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae). This is not a new practice.

I can remember on several occasions in the past where Ministers have, through some set of circumstances, not been able to be in their place during the discussion on second reading on their Bills. I know it is less than favourable; I fully understand that. We find ou rselves in a situation which does not allo w the Attorney-General and the Minis ter of Environment to be in their places today. The Acting Ministers are here and certainly we are prepared to list en to the detail with some considerable consciousness. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: The point is well taken . Mr. Cowan: Mr.

Speaker, on the same point, I certainly agree with the Acting House Leader that there are circumstances that arise from time to time where it not possible for a Minister to be in the House when his or her Bill is being spo�en to by either Members of his or her Gover nment or by Members of the Opposit ion.

In the past, it has been standard practice for the House Leader when that is the occasion to speak to the critics or to the Opposi tion House Leaders to express the concern that the Minister may not be able to be there and to work out as much as possible, on a consensus basis, whether or not that Bill would be spoken to at that time. I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that we are prepared to speak to the Bills today in the absence of the Ministers, but this is one of the last times that we are going to be doing so.

We are prepared to do so because the Acting House Leader has been cooperative with us in the past, but that individual cooperation between him and, I assume, the Liberal House Leader does not in any way excuse the fact that on far too many occasions, not just occasional ly, but as a matter of practice, Ministers have not been here when their Bills were being spoken to. That is a situation tha t we believe as responsible Opposition, and I think I speak for the Liberal caucus because -(Interject ion)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Cowan: I regret that the Minister of No rthern and Na tive Affairs (Mr.

Downey) in his typical partisan, parochial and nonsensical way has to interject himself into the debate. I will ignore those comments as- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Ho nourable Member for Chur chill (Mr . Cowan) has made his point . I understand you were not up on a point of order. The Honourable Member for Churchill was not up on a point of order. Mr. Cowan: I think if you will review Hansard, Mr. Speaker, you will see that, when I stood up, I stood up with the exact comment on the same point. Mr. Speaker: On the same point is right, but I did not recognize the Honour able Member for Churchill (Mr.

Cowan) on a point of order. I thank the Honour able Member for Churchill for helping the House Leaders work out some kind of arrangement to get us through the Bills today. I understand that the Acting Government House Leader (Mr. Manness) has said that the Acting Ministers will be here today so the Honourable Member for Churchill's point has been very well taken , and I think it ap pears that the Government is going to cooperate. DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS BILL NO. 6-THE FIRES PREVENTION AMENDMENT ACT Mr. Speaker : On the pro posed motion of the Honourable Minister of the Environment (Mr.

Connery), Bill No. 6, The Fires Prevention Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur la prev ention des incend ies, standing in the name of the Hono urable Mem ber for Churchill (Mr. Cowan). Mr. Jay Cowan (Churchill): Mr. Speaker, continuing on the point which I was making previous to your interruption , I was trying to indicate- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Cowan: I think you will find nothing offensive in that statement, Mr. Speaker. POINT OF ORDER Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): He accused the Speaker of interrupting him. Mr. Jay Cowan (Churchill): No, I did not, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps- Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Minister of Heal th, on a point of order. Mr. Orchard: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know that from time to time Members in this House make comments 1902

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 that they regret and I am certain that if the Member for Churchill (Mr. Cowan) reflects, as House Leader for the New Democratic Party, that he would not want the record to remain showing that he indicated that he wanted to continue with the same point he was making prior to you interrupting him, because I do not recall that anyone in this House has the ability to cast such reflections on you, Sir, in your office. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Churchill, on the same point of order. Mr.

Cowan: On the point of order, if the Member had listened carefully, he would have heard me say-and Hansard will in fact indicate that such was the case that I indicated that I would be continuing on the same point before your interru ption , not tha t you had interrupted me but that there was an interruption with respect to what I was saying. That, Mr. Speaker, is factual. That has never been considered a reflection on any individual in this House previously but, if we are going to ·s tart to consider interruptions to be reflections on individuals, then I would be prepared to restate that.

But I would also be prepared to stand in my place on every occasion when those Members interrupt Members on this side who are trying to make a point, to point out that it is a breach of Parliamen tary Rules and Procedures. I do not believe that to be the case. Mr. Speaker: Ord er, pl ease. Let me thank bot h Honour able Members. I will review Hansard. I will be very honest with you, I did not hear the Honourable Member for Churchill (Mr. Cowan) so I will review Hansard and I will report back to the House. The Honourable Member for Churchill will kindly carry on with his remarks on Bill No. 6. Mr.

Cowan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Carrying on with the points that I was making before, and I think it is relevant to the principle of this Bill and that is the fact that, without suggesting that an individual Minister is not present, there have been on too many occasions in the past in this House, during the tenure, the short tenure, the brief tenure of this Government, numerous occasions when Ministers who are responsible for Bills were not present when those Bills were being spoken to. Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Housing): I have been here for most of the Bills. Mr.

Cowan: We ll, the Min ister of Ho using (Mr . Ducharme) suggested he has been here for most of the Bills. Mr. Ducharme: All my Bills. *

(1430) Mr. Cowan: All his Bills, and all his Bills are, as he indicates graphically across the Chamber by holding his fing ers in a circle form, zip. He has had no Bills and that is one of the problems, Mr. Speaker, you see because only a couple of the Ministers have gotten their act together enough to bring Bills into this Legislature. We have heard all sorts of promises of Bills, we have heard all sorts of threats of Bills. But all we have seen are a couple of Ministers who have been able to bring Bills forward. Mr.

Speaker, what is also somewhat ironic is, when they have brought those Bills forward, those are almost exactly word for word the same Bills which the previous admin ist rat ion had brought forward or had prepared as part of their legisla tive package. lt is interesting that this Governme nt went so far out of its way to defeat the previous Govern ment, only to bring forward essentially the same Budget, except they had given some money back to their corporate friends and imposed some other hardships on seniors and others as a re sult of that Budget, and bring forward almost exactly the same legisla tive package.

The fact is that we were doing things wel l enough and could have continued on with that Budget and gotten the money from lnco, who could afford to provide the money to the Provincial Treasury, and gotten the money from � CPR who can afford to provide the money to Treasury, � and not imposed an additional deductibl e on seniors with respect to Pharmacare who cannot afford the money. (Mr.

Deputy Speaker, Mark Minenko; in the Chair.) We could have brought forward the same legisla tive package which would have included this Bill. lt is quite ironic and unusual and sad , in a way, th at the Governme nt has chosen to follo w pretty much to date what our legi slative package would have been, and at the same time has used their power, their new-found power, to give money back to the large corporations like lnco and CPR and to businesses across the province through the phasing-out of the health and education levy. So, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the fact is that the Bill we have before us is one of those Bills that was being prepared by the pre vious administra tion. lt is an important Bill. lt was one that had not received a full airing at the time of the defeat of the Government. The present administration has chosen to bring it in, I can assume, because (1) they think it is an important Bill, and (2) because they have not been able to get their other pieces of their legislative package together. The Minister of Housing (Mr. Ducharme) from his seat talks about there will be other Bills coming forward and he shakes his head, yes. Mr.

Ducharme: He knows the procedure. Mr. Cowan: He says I know the procedure. Let me deal with those three things. I know that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is asking the Minister of Housing not to intervene because , No. 1, he finds that the Minister of Housing is moving him over on to thin ice, and No. 2, he also knows that as the Minister of Housing injects himself into the debate, he is going to identify some other areas that need be discussed. Mr. Ducharme: He knows that, yes. 1903

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 Mr. Cowan: The Minister of Housing now says "I know that" and smile s, as does the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and the Deputy Premier (Mr. Cummings). The Bill before us provides for the charging of tuition fees for fire training at the fire colleges. I want to, just before addressing that specific backup to what the Min ister of Housing did say. I do not want to lose sight of the importance of his comments. He said that I knew the pr actice in this Ho use with respect to the introduction of legisla tion -i ndeed I do.

The practice of this House with respect to the introduction of leg islation is that there be some identification of the legislation in the Throne Speech if at all possible. We found that the Throne Speech was very bereft of any identification of specific pieces of legislation this last time around. So I can assume from that there is not a lot of legisla tion, yet the Minister of Housing is tellin g me that there is much more yet to come. Mr. Ducharme: Oh, sure. Mr. Cowan: He says, oh, sure, as he walks from his seat.

The rest of the process is that there be some consultation between the House Leaders with respect to legisla tion. I look to my colleague, the House Leader for the Liberal Party, because perhaps there has been consultation there of which I am not aware, but he shakes his head not. I know that there has not been a lot of consultation on legislation with myself by the Gover nment House Leader. So I can only assume that there has been very little, if any, consulta tion on legislation that is going to be brought forward this Session.

Now I find that particularly surprising because it does run contr ary and cou nter to pract ices tha t were establis hed before. lt is important to note that those practices that were establ ished before were established under majority Government scenarios and not minority Government scenarios. I remember the Liberal House Leader (Mr. Alcock) with, I think, some very good insights into the process when he first assumed that responsibility, said to me on numerous occasions, when is it going to be that the Government House Leader (Mr.

McCrae) is going to sit down and start to talk about their legislative package, because one would assume that in a minority Government situa tion, they would want to consult. They would want to consult mor e than th ey would in a majorit y Go vern ment situation. The fact is that there was a lot of consultation in a majority Government situation. So we were somewhat surprised that there had been extremely little consultation on the rest of the legislative package. That is why I find it par ticularly surprising that the Minister of Housing (Mr.

Ducharme) today would sit in his seat and yell across the floor that there is a lot more leg islation coming forward. No w I have to tell you, perhaps I had been somewhat naive in assuming that the Li beral House Leader (Mr. Alcock) was correct and that a minority Government would want to consult more about legislation than would a major ity Government and assuming that, because there had not been that consultation, there was not much legislation coming forward because quite frankly, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, when you bring forward The Fires Prevention Act, although we would like to be consulted on it, it does not require a great deal of consultation. lt does not require a great deal of consultation because it is no t a major Act, although it has major implications. lt can be amended quite easily if there are any concerns in the committee. So we would not expect a lot of consultation in this particular Act, given that it was also

an Act that we had looked at very seriously. One would not expect a lot of consultation on The Statute Law Amendment Acts and The Regulations Acts and The Re-enactment Acts because those are Acts that are fairly comprehensive, but at the same time the thrust behind those Acts is one that has been well established. The principle of how they proceed through the House is well establis hed. The Government, as did the Government previous to them, made the Legislative Counsel available to the caucuses, if they wanted to discuss the details of those particular Acts.

So one would not expect a lot of consultation in regard to that as well. That is mostly what is on the legisla tive agenda. But now I hear that I was naive in expecting that it was going to be a very small legisla tive package, that there is going to be much more legislation. Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Heavy duty stuff as well. Mr. Cowan: The Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), who is still within the caucus, knows things that perhaps the rest of us do not, and he indicates that there is a heavy legislative package coming forward. I do not know what that could be then. The Minister of Housing (Mr.

Ducharme) says he has legislation coming forward. Mr. Ducharme: Tons. Mr. Cowan: He says "tons" and I think that should be put clearly on the record. Perhaps he can take an opportunity some time in the near future, either in this House, by way of a formal declaration or speech or comment, or informally by way of consultations which have been so sorely lacking in the past, inform us as to wha t that legislation might be. POINT OF ORDER Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Honour able Minister of Finance, on a point of order. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Speaker, if the Honourable Member ch ooses not to speak to the Bill directly, I would hope he would signify such so I could get on with some other work, as 1 am intently trying to listen to him as I had pledged I would. But if he is not going to address the principle of the Bill, I then will begin some of my other work in my place. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Honour able Member for Churchill, directly to the point of order. Mr. Cowan: Directly to the point of order, yes. I was addressing my remarks to the process of developing 1904

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 legisla tion which did include this particular Bill and you will note, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I also mention ed that I was concerned about the consultative process on this. But just for the edification of the Acting House Leader (Mr. Manness), I was also addressing my remarks to him as the Acting House Leader in hopes that he would carry them to the House Leader about the process gener ally. Mr. Deputy Sp eaker: Order , pl ease. I thank all Honour able Memb ers for their advice.

I believe that it will be helpful to the House if I were to remind all Honourable Mem bers that on second reading it is the principle of the Bill under consid era tion which is debatable. I thank all Honourable Mem bers for their advice. Mr. Cowan: I guess perhaps I am at a bit of a quandary here and I would seek some advice from you, because I have always assumed that when talking to the principle of the Bill-and as a matter of fact, it has been an establ ished practice in the House on precedent that one also talks to the principl es tha t shape the development of that Bill.

How has that Bill, in fact, been brought forward, because in large part the effect of that Bill, more specifically, the attention given to that Bill by this House will be shaped by the process of development of that Bill.

If a Bill is de veloped in isolation without any consultation with affected groups out there, then you will find quite often that in second reading in this House Members talked about the fact that the Bill has been developed in isolation without consultation, and if the Government has not taken unto itself the oppor tunity to discuss that Bill with other individuals and to gain their insights and their input and hopefully to make a better Bill for that reason. The same goes through for consultation with the Opposi tion. I do want to get directly to the point. I would hope that the Acting House Leader (Mr.

Manness) would stop trying to distract me and deflect me from addressing the principle of the point, by points of order, the principl es of the Bill. What we have before us is the Bill that deals with volunteer fire departments. On a very serious and direct note, that is an extremely important issue in my own constituency. Far too often in northern Manitoba, we have seen too many tragic occurrences.

Residents of numerous communities in my constituency, particularly the ones who are not serviced by a road or in close proximity to an industrial operat ion, residents of those communities have seen too many friends and too many families suffer the tragic consequences that come with an inabili ty to fight fires once they start in those co mmunities. I know of many individuals perso nally who have suffered those sorts of consequences and therefore can speak with some personal expe rience, although not direct experience.

I too shared their bereavement in a way over the loss of good com muni ty residents, leaders with in the community, friends and families. I am certain that every member here has had that experience in one form or another in their own constituency. *

(1440) Mr. Cowan: All his Bills, and all his Bills are, as he indicates graphically across the Chamber by holding his fingers in a circle form, zip. He has had no Bills and that is one of the problems, Mr. Speaker, you see because only a couple of the Ministers have gotten their act together enough to bring Bills into this Legislature. We have heard all sorts of promises of Bills, we have heard all sorts of threats of Bills. But all we have seen are a couple of Ministers who have been able to bring Bills forward. Mr.

Speaker, what is also somewhat ironic is, when they have brought those Bills forward , those are almost exactly word for word the same Bills which the previous adminis tra tion had brought forward or had prepared as part of their legislative package. lt is interesting that this Government went so far out of its way to defeat the previous Government, only to bring forward essentially the same Budget, except they had given some money back to their corporate friends and imposed some other hardships on seniors and others as a re sult of that Budget, and bring forward almost exactly the same legisla tive package.

The fact � is that we were doing things well enough and could � have continued on with that Budget and gotten the money from lnco, who could afford to provide the money to the Provincial Treasury, and gotten the money from CPR who can afford to provide the money to Treasury, and not imposed an additional deductible on seniors with respect to Pharmacare who cannot afford the money. (Mr.

Deputy Speaker, Mark Minenko, in the Chair.) We could have brought forward the same legisla tive package which would have included this Bill. lt is quite ironic and unus ual and sad , in a way, th at the Government has chosen to follo w pretty much to date what our legisla tive package would have been, and at the same time has used their power, their new-found power, to give money back to the large corporations like lnco and CPR and to businesses across the province through the phasing-out of the health and education levy. So, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the fact is that the Bill we have before us is one of those Bills that was being prepared by the previous admin istra tion. lt is an important Bill. lt was one that had not received a full airing at the time of the defeat of the Government. The present administration has chosen to bring it in, I can assume, because (1) they think it is an important Bill, and (2) because they have not been able to get their other pieces of their legis lative package together. The Minister of Housing (Mr. Ducharme) from his seat talks about there will be other Bills coming forward and he shakes his head, yes. Mr.

Ducharme: He knows the procedure. Mr. Cowan: He says I know the procedure. Let me deal with those three things. I know that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) is asking the Minister of Housing not to intervene because, No. 1, he finds that the Minister of Housing is moving him over on to thin ice, and No. 2, he also knows that as the Minister of 1905

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 Housing injects himself into the de bate, he is going to identify some other areas that need be discussed. Mr. Ducharme: He knows that, yes. Mr. Cowan: The Minister of Housing now says "I know that" and smiles, as does the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and the Deputy Premier (Mr. Cummings). The Bill before us provides for the charging of tuition fees for fire training at the fire colleges. I want to, just before addressing that specific backup to wha t the Minister of Housing did say. I do not want to lose sight of the importance of his comments.

He said that I knew the practice in this Ho use with respect to the introduction of legislation -in deed I do. The practice of this House with respect to the introduction of legislation is that there be some identification of the legislation in the Throne Speech if at all possible. We found that the Throne Speech was very bereft of any identification of specific pieces of legislation this last time around. So I can assume from that there is not a lot of legisla tion, yet the Minister of Housing is telling me that there is much more yet to come. Mr. Ducharme: Oh, sure. Mr.

Cowan: He says, oh, sure, as he walks from his seat. The rest of the process is tha t there be some consultation between the House Leaders with respect to legisla tion. I look to my colleague, the House Leader for the Liberal Party, because perhaps there has been consultation there of which I am not aware, but he shakes his head not. I know that there has not been a lot of consultation. Mr. Deputy Speaker: The Honour able Member for Churchill, directly to the point of order. Mr. Cowan: Directly to the point of order, yes.

I was addressing my remarks to the process of developing legislation which did include this particular Bill and you will note, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I also mentioned that I was concerned about the consultative process on this. But just for the edification of the Acting House Leader (Mr. Manness), I was also addressing my remarks to him as the Acting House Leader in hopes that he would carry them to the House Leader about the process generally . Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order , pl ease. I thank all Honourable Mem bers for their advice.

I believe that it will be helpful to the House if I were to remind all Honour able Mem bers that on second reading it is the princi ple of the Bill un der consi dera tion which is debatable. I thank all Honour able Members for their advice. Mr. Cowan: I guess perhaps I am at a bit of a quandary here and I would seek some advice from you, because I have always assumed that when talking to the principle of the Bill -a nd as a matter of fact, it has been an established practice in the House on precedent that one also talks to the princi ples that shape the develop ment of that Bill.

How has that Bill, in fact, been brought forward, because in large part the effect of that Bill, more specifically, the attention given to that Bill by this Hous e will be shaped by the process of development of that Bill.

If a Bill is developed in isola tion without any consultation with affected groups out there, then you will find quite often that in second reading in this House Members talked about the fact that the Bill has been develop ed in isolation without consultation, and if the Government has not taken unto itself the opportunity to discuss that Bill with other individuals and to gain their insights and their input and hopefully to make a better Bill for that reason. The same goes through for consultation with the Opposition. I do want to get directly to the point. I would hope that the Acting House Leader (Mr.

Manness) would stop trying to distract me and deflect me from addressing the principle of the point, by points of order, the principles of the Bill. What we have before us is the Bill that deals with volunteer fire departments. On a very serious and direct note, that is an extremely important issue in my own constituency. Far too often in northern Manitoba, we have seen too many tragic occurrences.

Residents of numerous communities in my constituency, particularly the ones who are not serviced by a road or in close proximity to an industrial operation, residents of those communities have seen too many friends and too many families suffer the tragic consequences that come with an inabil ity to fight fires once they start in those communities. I know of many individuals personally who have suffered those sorts of consequences and therefore can speak with some personal experience, although not direct experience.

I too shared their bereavement in a way over the loss of good com muni ty residents, leaders within the community, friends and families. I am certain that every member here has had that experience in one form or another in their own constituency. *

(1440) But it is a particularly difficult problem in northern remote communities and in rural remote communities, more so in the North, and I will come directly to why I believe that to be the case in a few moments. But we have seen those communities suffer the loss of life. We have seen them suffer the loss of prope rty.

We have seen them suffer the loss of opportun ity because of fir es th at were unable to be fo ught in their own com muni tie s becaus e there was no t appropr iate equipment, there was not proper training, there was not the ongoing type of skill development that would enable those fires to be fought effectively. lt was not because the people in the community did not try very hard to fight the fires, and it was not because they did not want to fight the fires. lt was not because they were not very brave individuals because they did want to fight the fires and they were brave individuals.

They just did not have the tools available to them to do the type of job that was necessary to save, most importantly, life and to save, secondly, most importantly, prope rty. For that reason, Mr. Deputy Speaker, they live in constant fear of fire in many of those communities. Th ere is also another problem in no rthern communities, particularly again the ones that are more 1906

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 remote, and that is the type of construction that went on over the years. You have a large number of wood frame houses that were not constructed with all the same types of safety features that houses in other parts of the province are constructed, and they are much more vulnerable to fire for that reason. Once they do catch fire, they are much more prone to burn very quickly. I see the Member for Lakeside (Mr.

Enns) shaking his head because I know he has exactly the same type of problem in many areas in his constituency where you have the older wood-frame housing not perhaps built to the same standards because it is older, as we have housing built today and it is much more vulnerable to fire. He also has the same problem, Mr. Deputy Speaker, with distance, distance from a fire hall or distance from a water source that they have in northern communities. That is a problem that we tried to address when we were in Go vernment.

I bel ieve the previ ous administration, the Lyon administration, tried to address it as well, and I know that this administration will continue to try to address it through the upgrading of fire equipment, the building of fire halls and the training of fire volunteers in those communities on an ongoing basis. I hope they are able to carry forward the momentum that we were able to create over the last number of years. The fact is that the circumstances there are not what they should be at the present time. This piece of legislation gives us an opportunity to deal with that.

I am not certain that it goes far enough, but it does give us an opportun ity to deal with at least one part of the problem. Let me address all of the parts before coming to that specific part. As I indicated earli er, there are many individuals in those communities who are prepared to fight fires. They are prepared to risk their lives in fighting fires although they should not have to do so. One would hope that they would be able to fight fires safely and that is why this Bill is so important in the longer run, but they need tra ining. They need trai ning on basic firef ighting techniques.

They need training on new equipment which hopefully will be brought into their communities. They need constant trai ning and upgr ading on newer techniques as they become available.

In that respect, they are no different from the professional firefighter in Winnipeg or Brandon or Thompson, nor are they any different from the volunteer firefighter in so many other communiti es throughout the province and northern communities such as Gil lam, Chur chill, Lynn Lake and Leaf Rapids, where they have volunteer fire brigades that not only deal with the needs, say, with respect to fi refighting but also assist in many other community activities.

In the smaller communities because of size, inherent with that situation -i t is not a problem -b ut inherent with the situation of small size, they are going to have fewer people to call upon for volunteer activities.

Because they have fewer people to call upon for volunteer activities, they are going to have to make the most effective use of those who are prepared to volunteer. lt is also a problem that is---,and the problem is not the size of the community but the lack of sufficient numbers to volu nteer- also synergistic in the sense tha t no t only are tho se volunt eer fi refig hters vo lu nteeri ng fi ref ighting duty, but they are also volunteering for all sorts of other community activities. I spoke to someone from a rural community just the other day who had come into the city from Virden to attend a meeting.

She told me that you know, Jay, she said, it is becoming a real problem in our communities because a lot of the younger people are leaving, and we know that to be case, and a lot of us more establis hed residents, the ones who have been there longer-y ou note I do not say, older residents -b ut the ones who have lived in the co mmunity longer and are more likely to stay in the communi ty are finding that a lot of the activities that were once done on a volu nteer basis by the younger people are not being done anymore because there are fewer younger people and they are going to have to take on more of the respon sibil ity.

They say, we are just getting tired. How much more can we volunteer for? it is a problem that is experienced all throughout the province where you have small populations or decreasing populations. it is not one that is particular to the North, but it is one � that is a particular concern in the North because it is , such a long-standing problem for those communities.

While we understand that people do give up freely of their time and they do try to perform a community service through volu nteer firefighting, they are also being asked to perform a whole lot of other volu nteer services and there is only so much time and so much energy that any one individual has. We have to make the most effective use of their time. I will come back to that if I have a bit more time at the conclusion of my remarks. The second area that is of major concern as a northern resident, and one which is not identified directly in this Bill but I believe, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, is relevant to the Bill itself is that of equipment for those communities. A lot of the problems in those more remote communities that do not have a strong tax base, in some instances have a very meager tax base and are dependent upon Government for a large part of the revenue, is that they cannot purchase firefighting equipment that is modern, up to date and of a nature that is suf ficient to fulfi l! all the needs of the communities. You do not have fi re hydrants in a lo t of the communities, primarily because you do not have running water.

If you do not have running water, you are not going to be able to set up a fire hydrant system because you do not have the lines to serve that fire hydrant system.- (Interjection)- The Member for Lakeside (Mr. Enns), whom I am finding myself agreeing with much too much today but I find it a pleasant experience, is saying that I am absolutely right. He knows in his own area that there are communities that do not have water lines and, for that reason, they do not have things which we take for granted in other parts of the province such as fire hydrants every so many blocks.

What you need is trucks that can carry water. So the communities have to have specially-built trucks that go beyond the type of fire truck you have for normal firefighting in the city and are designed so that they can pump water into them quickly and take the water 1907

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 right to the site of the fire and fight the fire in that way. So you need those trucks. When you have those trucks in an environment where quite often it goes down to 30 and 40 below during the winter months, you need somewhere to house those trucks. You need a heated facility to house those trucks, so you need a fire hall. Up until a couple of years ago, as a matter of fact up until the past decade, we did not see many fire halls in those northern communities.

As a matter of fact, it would be a rarity if you saw a fire hall in a small com munit y such as Brochet, Shamattawa -(Interjection)- The Member for Lakeside {Mr. Enns) says Woodlands. I do not have perso nal experience there but it may in fact be the case, I agree with him. Many of the problems are exactly the same, and I am interested in hearing what he has to say when it is his opportun ity to speak to this Bill. I think we will find that we are in far more areas of agreement than we are able to put on the record during my short comments to the Bill.

I hope that I can provide him the same sort of support in improving fire conditions in his constituency as he is providing and showing for the needs of firefighting systems and personnel in northern Manitoba. So you need th ose fire halls. We do think we have a large number of fire halls now that have been constructed under different federal provincial agreements and different provincial programs over the past number of years. As a matter of fact, Mr. Deputy Speaker, some of those fire halls have been constructed under Jobs Fund Programs and under the Community Places Program.

That is why Northerners, and particularly Members of the New Democratic Party, were so concerned to see the Jobs Fund elimina ted because it did provide tha t sort of assistance to communities that required some very basic needs. • { 1450) I understand that the Con servatives have a philosophical disagreement with the concept of the Jobs Fund, and I also appreciate the fact that the Liberal Leader {Mrs. Carstairs) during the campaign, and I assume she spoke for the present caucus, came out and said that the Jobs Fund was not an effective use of provincial monies.

I have to tell you that when it comes to the needs of a community that had a fire hall built under the Jobs Fund, they do not understand how you developed that philosophical approach that said that money was not required or how you develo ped, to the Liberal Party, that politi cal approach that said that the Jobs Fund was not required, because they know full well the advantages that it brought to their community. The fire halls are only a part of the equipment needs of the co mmunity though. They also need the basic equipment that is used in firefig hting.

They also need pumps that enable them to pump water from their water source to the truck so that the truck can be made ready for fi res on numerous occasions.

That is the type of equipment that is required, and this Bill does not address that but perhaps, when debating the Bill, we can take this opportun ity to make known our collective concern as individuals within this Chamber that those sorts of programs that provide that equipment not be discontinued but be unhanced until every community, whether it is Woodlands or Brochet or Shamattawa or Winnipeg or Thomps on or Lynn Lake or Gillam, have the type of equipment that they require to ensure the safety of their residents and the protection of their community.

In northern communities, however, we have to go one step further. I had talked a bit earlier about the problems with the Hydro housing construction. We have wood-frame houses built a long time ago. The electrical systems were not as sophisticated as the ele ctrical systems we have here, and they are not as well maintained. No w, when I say they are not as well maintained , I do not want anyone to misconstrue that as a reflection on the individuals who live in the houses, because I will tell you, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I know how to fool around a bit with some housekeeping needs and some home maintenance needs in my own house but I do not like to work on the electrical system. You are shaking your head no, and you are probably shaking your head no for exactly the same reason as I do not like to work on the electrical system. Talk about very, very scary. That is very, very scary, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

If the National Citizens' Coalition wanted to put their money in, I think, a much more productive endeavour, they should talk about how scary people should be with respect to untrained people working on electrical systems, rather than trying to gene rate fear where fear does not exist, nor should it exist. I do not know if you would permit me a brief aside, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, but I find that campaign amusing and somewhat contradictory, because what the coalition is saying is that one Leader is very, very scary because he actually means what he says and he is going to do what he says, and he is going to, when elected -and he is going to be elected -m ake good on his promises, and they find that very, very scary. I think what the general population finds very, very scary is the fact that politic ians are far too often elected, saying they are going to do things that they do not have any intention of doing, and tha t they are not going to do and tha t they never do.

So, I think that the coalition has focused its energies in the wrong way but I know that from what I hear, as I talk to people throughout the province, that campaign is having exactly the type of effect that we would like it to have and that is people say, thank goodne ss there is one polit ician that is going to do what he says he is going to do. We do not find that very, very scary. We find that very, very refreshing, and very, very illum inating, and very, very positive, and something we want to support. But I do not want to stray too far from the principle of the Bill.

I just thought that you would indulge me in a brief aside, considering how important the issue was. In northern co mmunities, again with the older type of housing, the wood-frame housing, the different standards under which that housing was constructed and the fact that the electrical maintenance in those communi ties is not what it would be in another community because there are not skilled tradespeo ple 1908

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 in those communities who can work on the houses at a reasonable fee. They have to be flown in, in many instances, and there is a real cost factor to that, a factor which many of the residents cannot afford. We have more chance of fire and, when the fire does start, we have more chance of that fire burning very quickly. We have a more difficult circumstance in fighting that fire because of the other issues which I have addressed earlier. The second factor with respect to individual houses that should be addressed is the fact that a lot of those houses are heated by wood stoves.

No twithstan ding the fact that wood provides a very good heat source and is a very inexpens ive heat sou rce in th ose communities and is traditional and one which many of the residents enjoy, as do many of the Members in this House when they have an oppor tunity to have either a wood stove or a fireplace in their own house, they do cause fires. We all get warnings here about, if we have firepla ces, about having our chimneys kept free of soot and the buildup of wood-combustion products.- (l nterject ion) The Member for Thompson (Mr . Ashton) asks if I have a chimney in my own house.

Yes, I do, and we keep it cleaned on a regular basis and we -( lnterject ion) well, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) asks if we burn elm-d iseased wood. I can tell him, no, that we do not have diseased elms in our locale and we would not buy it if it was available, but it is not available. We burn primarily birch wood, which I find to be a very good wood if it has been properly seasoned to burn. lt is not a bad wood to burn in the city, because it burns very hot and you do not get a buildup of wood combustion products in the chimney which can cause chimney fires later on.

However, in the northern communities, you do not have that birch supply readily available. There is a lot more burning of softer woods and those -(lnt erject ion) well, if I could say that the Minister of Housing (Mr. Ducharme) was leaving, which I cannot, I will not. I would say that I regret that he was leaving because I enjoyed his assistance in shaping this speech. But the point I am trying to make is an important point. * (1 500) In the North, you do burn different types of wo od, softer woods because you do not have the harder wood readily available to the community.

For that reason, you do have more chimney fires because you have more wood-combustion products gett ing trapped in the chimney because it is a cooler fire and not qu ite as hot. I do not want to make light of that because that is one of the reasons for many fires in the North.

The point I was starting to make before I was somewhat distracted was that there is a further need for equipment in northern communities, and that is for equipment that is right in the hous e, for example, fire extinguishers that are in the house in close proximity to the wood-burning stove or the wood-burning furnace which some houses have now so that in case there is a fire in the house one can respond very quickly and not have to rely on the fire department. The other piece of equipment that is required in the hous es the msel ves are smoke detec tors.

The fir e extingu isher is not going to do you a lot of good if you are asleep and the fire starts and you do not know it has started . The smoke detector, which we take for granted in the city again, is a valuable way of protecting residents in th ose communities where the houses are more prone to fire and more susceptible to fire damage once a fire has started . There has to be a program that is ongoing to provide fire extinguishers and to provide smoke detectors to equip houses in northern Manitoba. Going one step beyond that and then coming back full circle, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is training.

We started out talking about training for firefighters, men and women across the province who are volunteering their time or who are working at a job to protect the citizenry with respect to the loss of life and the loss of prope rty. We think that is very important, but it is also important in northern communities that we have training for homeowners and residents of houses that will enable them to ensure that the house is mai ntained in a fire- � safe manner, to ensure that the smoke detectors are working and maintained, and to fight fires if they should occur in their house as a first response to that fire.

Some people would say, why do you need that in the North if you do not need that in other areas of the province? The fact is you do have that in other areas of the province. You have it on TV, you have it in publications, you have it in the fire departments coming around and checking houses occasionally and going on campaigns about making your house fireproof and making it more safe from fire. That is exactly the type of program that you need in the North. This Bill enab les the Government to charge tuition, and there have been some concerns expressed earlier about the open-ended ness of this Bill.

Others have addressed that and I think it would be sufficient for me to say I share those concerns without going into any detail on them. But the Bill should also be used as a way to discuss the overall approach to preventing fires and to fighting fires when they do occur. That is what I have tried to do in my comments on second reading with respect to the principle of the Bill, which is the principle of protecting our communities and our residents from the tragic consequences of fires.

If this Bill can do that and if we can, by our active involvement in the debate, provide encouragement and support for those sorts of activities to be undertaken, then I think the Bill has accomplished much more than it was intended to accomplish. By being in effective Opposition and taking the oppor tunity to par ticipate in the Bill, we have made it a better Bill. We have helped the Government become a better Government, and they need all the help that they can get in that respect. For tha t reason, we have spent our time productively and well and in the finest tradition of this House.

I note that my time has nearly expired, Mr. Speaker. There were a couple of other points that I had hoped to be able to make, but I am certain there will be more 1909

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 opportunities on this Bill when it proceeds to committee and when it comes back for third reading to make my specific comments. I know that some of my colleagues will want to speak to the Bill as wel l. With that in mind, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I conclude my remarks. Mr. Gilles Roch: I move, seconded by the Member for Selkirk (Mrs. Charles), that debate be adjourned . MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 8-THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH SMALL CLAIMS PRACTICES AMENDMENT ACT Mr. Speaker: On the pr op osed motion of the Honour able Attorne y-General (Mr. McCrae), Bill No. 8, The Court of Queen's Bench Small Claims Practices Amend ment Act; Loi mod ifiant la

Loi sur le recouvrement des petites creances a la Cour du Banc de la Reine, standing in the name of the Honourable • Member for Brandon East (Mr. Evans), the Honourable • Member for Brandon East. Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk for a few minutes about the Bill and join- unless I am goaded into further words by my friend, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), who might inspire me to great thought s and great debating point s in the process .- (Interjec tion) - That happens, tha t happens, I have seen it happen in this House on both sides.

In fact, I just watched the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) add another 10 minutes to the speech of the Member for Churchill (Mr. Cowan) in making a point. I would commend the Attorney -General (Mr. McCrae) for bringing this legislation forward. lt is a good piece of legislation, The Court of Queen's Bench Small Claims Practices Act and, from the speeches that I have read that have been made on this subject previously, it seems that there is unanimity on it, although there have been a few suggestions made.

My research shows also this is something that was under consideration by the previous administration and obviously it is something that has come forward because its time has come. Its time has come and I think the people of Manitoba will congratulate the Government, the Legislature, for bringing this forward and seeing it passed. As I understand, fundamentally, it raises the monetary jurisdiction to $5,000.00.

I think there are some nuances there but basically it substantially increases the level. lt allo ws the introduction of a de fau lt judgm ent procedure so that if a defendant does not appear, the plaintiff has it settled in his favour. So in effect you cannot simply adjourn the case, as I understand it. Thirdly, it ensures that small claims are heard in the Small Claims Court, and indeed it ensures that it acts as a people's court to the extent that you can have a people's court.

There are a number of benefits from this, but my experience in dealing with a lot of constituents over the years, many do become very leery about going to court.

Most people have not had any experience in going to court and, if this legislation somehow or other alleviates the necessity for many Manito bans to go to court, it will be welcomed. lt certainly makes it easier for the average citizen to have his or her problem dealt with. lt lessens the need for lawyers. lt would be interesting to see whether the Law Society of Manitoba or some organ ization represe nting the laiNyers may oppose this because it may take away some work from them. That is a possibility.

I do not have the statistics on the number of cases that are now dealt with in the Court of Queen's Bench that could be dealt with in Small Claims Court to know what the impact will be quantitatively but, generally speaking, it should lessen the need for lawyers. In fact, it could perhaps cut the costs of Legal Aid in Manitoba substa�Jtially because a lot of people in low income brackets do refer to Legal Aid for assistance. This costs the taxpayers money.

If we could save some Legal Aid costs, this would be great as well. * (15 10) On the other hand, by raising the level there will be more cases coming to Small Claims Court. lt might encourage, it might open up this area for pe ople. There may be more demand of the court simply because it looks that it is more accessible, leading to more cases being heard. lt has been suggested that some of the major creditors may use it mor e frequently than they have in the past. There is no question that it would reduce the amount of time in Small Claims Court. lt would certainly make it more efficient.

More than the majority of the claims go undisputed, therefore, you would have judgments rendered in less time than present and certainly with a lot of less formality. For those cases that are disputed, more court time would be allowed for the hearing officer to have to listen to the case and would allo w for more effective decisions to be rendered at the time of hearing. Generally speaking, we should have a more efficient situation. Certainly, it could reduce the costs of the higher courts, ttie Court of Queen's Bench, simply because the cases do not have to go there.

Hopefully, it could reduce some of the logjam that appears today in the higher courts. So there are a lot of good reasons for the Leg islature to pass this particular piece of legislation. In a more humorous vein, I have never had the need to go to a Small Claims Court myself. I have not paid too much attention, although I do recall a rather humorous incident thr ee or four years ago when someone who did not, for whatever reason, like the decision of the court, was about to accost-in fact he did take a punch at the cour t officer. I do not know whether he was the deputy registrar or who.

The reason I remember it is because this is the same person who was contending for the Liberal Party of Manitoba leadership. Obviously, he did not win the leadership but he was one of the contende rs at that time. I think he was staying at the Holida y Inn. There was some dispute about a hotel bill, whatever. At any rate, it appeared before the Small Claims Court and, for some 1910

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 reason or other, he became a little upset about it and decided to take a poke at the registrar of the court. An Honourable Member: Who did that, Len? Mr. Leonard Evans: A Liberal Party Leader contestant. I found that to be rather humorous because the same person was making a lot of scurrilous allegations about myself a year or two before that the press seemed to want to take seriously. The only question I have, therefore, is whether we need more pol ice protection for the officers of the court in case you have some people who get a little angry about the decisions being laid down.

There is one suggest ion I would like to make and that is with regard to the problem of inflation. We have experienced inflation of the order of about 4 percent to 5 percent per year, more or less, for the last several years. If you go back five, six, seven years, the inflation rate was much more rapid than that. lt was much higher and we know what inflation does. lt certainly devalues the doll ar. For every point of inflation in a year, it means that the value of our dollar, the estimated value, drops.

In terms, therefore, of this particular limit, I would suggest that even with the modest 5 percent inflation, in a matter of a few years, the limit in today's dolla rs will be much lo wer. If you would ma ke a simpl e calculation at 5 percent inflat ion after this legislation is passed, in a year from now, assuming we continue to have 5 percent inflation, and that is not an unrealistic assumption, it could even be higher but I hope that is not the case. I would like to see it a bit lower, but I think 5 percent, 4 percent, 5 percent, 6 percent is not an unreasonable guesstimate of what might happen in the future.

But if we took 5 percent, by Year 2, the value in today's dolla rs, 1988 dolla rs, would be $4,760; if we go to Year 3, it would be down to $4,530; Year 4, it would only be $4,320; by Year 5, it would be $4 ,11 4 or nearly a reduction of $900 of value in five years. You could look at it in a different way and say, what would you need to have in order to keep up with this rate of inflation.

You just make a reverse calculation so by Year 2, instead of $5,000, if you wanted to give the person the same amount of leeway and limit as we have in the legisla tion, you would have to arrange to raise it to $5,250.00. lt is on a simple calculation. The third year, it would be roughly $5,500; in the fourth year, it would be nearly $5,800; and the fifth year, it would be nearly $6, 100.00. In other words, five years from now, what the amount of limit should read would be $6, 100 to give you the same $5, 000 that we are talking about today if you have 5 percent inflation per annum.

Wha t I am sugges ting is tha t we look at -the Attorney-G eneral (Mr. McCrae) may wish to consider this by way of an amendment perhaps, and that is to build into the legislation some kind of an indexing factor. We have legisla tion before this House. This House has passed legislation in the past with an indexing factor, one referring to MLAs' expense allo wances, the per diem allo wances, and certainly with reg ard to salaries.

So th ere is a prec edent where we have passed legislation with a formula that seems to work fairly reasonably. lt is not overly complicated, can be written into the legislation if we really mean what we say here, that we want to raise the level to $5,000.00. If it is good enough in the year 1988, why do we not assure that level, that limit, for the years ahead? The simp lest way of doing that is to build in, bring an amendment to allo w for some kind of an indexing formula. 1t need not be-and it could be rounded off. Then the formula sometimes may end up with $5, 500.32 or somet hing like that.

I am not suggesting you go to the ridiculous. You can round it off. You can come up with some sort of a reasonable approach. So, having made tho se remarks, Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier , we are quite pleased that it is here. I am not a lawyer. I do not know all the ramifications of what is being done but, on the surface and from what I have read, it is the right move. lt will be a move supported and welcomed by the people of Manitoba, and I trust that it will be passed in due course by this Legislature. Mr. Speaker: The Honour able Member for Selkirk. Mrs.

Gwen Charles (Selkirk): I move, seconded by the Honour able Mem ber for Springfield (Mr. Roch), that debate on Bill No. 8 be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 9-STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT (RE-ENACTED STATUTES) ACT Mr. Speaker: On the propos ed motion of the Honour able Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae), Bill No. 9, The Statute Law Amendment (Re-enacted Statutes) Act; Loi modifiant diverses dispositions IE�gislatives (Lois readoptees) standing in the name of the Honour able Memb er for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). (Stand) BILL NO. 11-THE CHILD CUSTODY ENFORCEMENT AMENDM ENT ACT Mr.

Speaker: On the propo sed motion of the Honour able Attorney-General (Mr. McCrae), Bill No. 11 , The Child Custody Enforcement Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

loi sur !'e xecution des ordonnances de garde, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for lnkster (Mr. Lamoureux). Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (lnkster): I would take an adjournme nt on this particular Bill in place of the Honour able Member for Seven Oaks, if he will take my spot, thank you. Mr. Mark Minenko (Seven Oaks): I would like to certainly begin and thank the Honour able Member for Lake side (Mr . Enns) for encou rag ing me in my comments this afternoon. Being a member of the practising Bar of the Province of Manitoba, I certainly have an interest in developments in this area of law, the family law of the Province of Manitoba. Tha t interest comes from not only indeed 191 1

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 my concern with respect to matters relating to the family, but also born from some experience practising in this area of the law. * (1 520) lt was indeed a pleasure for me several years ago, in 19 84, to participate in a People's Law Conference wher e there were participants from across Canada at an event held in Ottawa.

These participants came from varied backgrounds, varied experiences, and provided all participants of that conference with their own unique perspective on the state of family law throughout the provi nces in our Dominion of Canada. lt was indeed a pleasure and honour to listen to many of them. From Manitoba, ther e were a numb er of representatives from the Family Law

section of the Attorney-General's Department. There were persons attending from the Faculty of Law at the University of Man itoba and general practitione rs who certainly came with their own perspective and were prepared to advise � the legislators who were there, the practitioners of family ' law and others who have an impact on the direction of family law, not just in our Province of Manitoba but the other jurisdictions in Canada. Mr. Speaker, I would certainly be the first to attest to the evolution of the laws relating to matters relating to families in the Province of Manitoba over the last several years.

As a student at the Faculty of Law at the University of Manitoba, we are provided with a perspective on the history of law generally through the lectures taught and prepared by Professor Edwards, who had at one time served as the Dean of the Ma nitoba Law School, and more specifically in the area of family law with the able and capable professors there. (The Acting Speaker, Mr. Edward Helwer, in the Chair.) We covered many cases where there were certain inequities in the past that legislators, both here in the Province of Manitoba and other jurisdictions, have attempted to address. May I add, Mr.

Acting Speaker, that it is important for us to consider the impact of laws in other ju risdictions and other pr ovi nces throughout Canada as these laws are often used in arguments by lawyers here in our province. They were often considered by the various courts, the Court of Queen 's Bench Family Division here in Winnipeg, the Provincial Court performing the same function outside the City of Winnipeg, as well as the Manitoba Court of Appeal .

Although laws of other jurisdictions do not force a court here in the Province of Manitoba to act on their advice, on their decisions, they are certainly persuasive in showing the general direction of where the law in the other jurisdictions are going. I believe that the decisions and the laws in the Province of Manitoba are leading the way in Canada to ensure that rights of various parties are indeed protected, protected in a way that was at times unfamiliar to lawyers and the courts and legisla tors in the past 100 or so years which has led to the evolution of the Province of Manitoba.

That is an important aspect of the development, is that we certainly need to look to our society, to reflect on the direction of our society of the general waves and flows that we see to enact laws that impact positively on people. lt is sometimes too easy for Legislatures at various levels to become somewhat insula ted from the day-to-day activiti es of our constituents, from the day-to-day activities and the impact of the laws which are considered in this Chamber and how they affect the daily lives of Manitobans. lt is indeed an honour for me to participate in this afternoon 's debate on the amendments before us in this Bill.

I hope that through my participation as a lawyer in various proceedings before the courts and, as a final resort I may add, participation in many of these family disputes that I would be able to at least suggest a little bit of the impact that the laws that are made here have on the se people. Over the last several years, the legal profession has seen the expansion and refinement of the various laws of the Province of Manitoba, The Maint enanc e Enforcement Act, Acts deal ing with property and federally, of course, the ch anges to the Divorce Act.

Along with these acts, what we must consider is the rules that are set out by the Court of Queen's Bench in order to assist all Manitobans to better use the court system that we have in place to attain the objectives that they have set for themselves. These rules are not a secret.

They are not set in some corner of some dusty libr ary collecting dust; and I might add that in fact the regulations and the rules relating to family law can be easily obtained and easily read by any Manitoban who wishes to come into the great library presently in the facilities of the Law Courts Building, who can ask direction of the librarians and the researchers there to show them where they are and how these regulations and rules can be fou nd.

In fact, I would like to add that what is included in these rules and regulations are the forms that are required to be used by anyone wishing to become part of the court system. This is indeed, I think, an important aspect and certainly people have available to them these forms and so on. They themselves can work through the plethora of different forms and regulations that are required in order to deal in the area of family law. * (1 530) There have been many recent developments in these rules, for example, the development of a pre-trial conference.

One of the objectives of this pre-trial conference is to allo w the petitioner, the respondent in any particular family matter, to bring their matter before a judge who will then sit down with the attorneys, if the petitioner or respondent have chosen to seek the assistance of counsel, and those five people, along with a member of the court staff, will sit down and review the facts and circumstances of that particular action. This is indeed, I belie ve, in some quarters to be held a very valuable tool because-a nd I am sure the Attorney -General (Mr .

McCrae) of the Province of Manitoba will be interested in perhaps at some time providing us with information dealing on the success of people attending these pre-trial conferences and not going on to a trial. I would certainly ask the Attorney General that he perhaps ask his staff to consider and 1912

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 perhaps table at some time in the future these statistics, if they are available, to see whether this pre-trial conference is cutting down the number of trials in the Family Court system in the Province of Manitoba. I am sure we would all. be interested in taking a look at those statistics. Ho wever , Mr. Acting Sp ea ker, although th ese developm ents have led to a well-struct ured system , a system that, I may add, is certainly under constant review, there have been recommendations as to how to make it more efficient than otherwise.

One of the unfortunate aspects in the increase in the different types of proceedings that are made available to litiga nts is the increasing legal costs. These increasing legal costs are of concern to everyone. They are of concern not only to the litigants who are involved and are faced with legal bills tha t they may not have originally anticipated, but they are of concern to lawyers as wel l. Lawyers, I believe, Mr.

Acting Speaker, are concerned because sometimes these fees are such that people may not wish to pursue their rights, the rights that have been made available to them through changes to laws relating to families. This is indeed of concern. Certainly a concern that I have is that those people who do not fit within the parameters, within the guidelines as set out by Legal Aid, and those who indeed earn a very good dollar at whatever they do, it is those people in between those two extremes who are hurt most. They are hurt most because of the most recent incr eases in ta xes.

The y are hur t because they sometimes may not be able to afford to enforce the rights that are available to them. Another thing that I have certainly learned and has been reinforced is that matters relating to family law should not be a woman versus man's issue. lt is unfortunate when legislators take one side or the other. I believe, as all Members of the Legislature believe, that we are all equal and we should be equal before the law and before the courts.

The enforcement of access has become one of the most difficult and frustrating areas of family law. lt is difficult for a number of reaso ns. lt is difficult for it is not like cash or dollars or awards of maintenance which are awarded to one party or the other in a family law dispute for, if one party or the other against whom an order for maintenance has been made is unable or chooses not to pay that maintenance, the person to whom the maintenance award has been made may then, through the Maintenance Enforcement Branch of the Attorney-G eneral 's Office, enforce those rights.

I would add for the knowledge of all Mem bers of the House that it is an almost standard item to be included in any order of the Family Court of Wi nnipeg that the maintenance to be paid from one party to the other is to be made through the Maintenance Enforcement Branch. That branch has evolved into a very efficient and effective system where it is but a matter of a few months of arrears that this matter is brought to the attention of the courts in the Province of Manitoba.

If, for example, a particular party to an action has not paid maintenance, Maintenance Enforcement would issue a summons for that person to appear before the Court of Queen's Bench. This appearance is to be made within a reasonably short period of time in order for that particular individual, a defaulter, to advise the court as to why they are in arrears, and to ensure that particular defaulter is complying with an order of the Court of Queen's Bench in the Province of Manitoba. * (15 40) Sometime s the person appearing before this Maintenance Enforcement Court has a valid reason for being in arrears.

I have indeed represented many an individual before this court because that individual has perhaps lost their job, has become ill or other changes in circumstances varying from those circumstances which were present at the time of the court order. Again, the ind ividua l brought before the Mai nten anc e Enforcement Court is often advised, whether he is represented by counsel or not, that if there indeed has been a change in circumstances that individual should be applying to the court in which the order was originally made for a variation of that order.

No w that variation appl ication is an important instrument in ensuring that � the court is made aware of the circumstances of the � parties to any particular action. However, I have discovered that there are perhaps two reasons why many people do not use the court application to vary the original order before they are actually summoned . May I just interject at this point that a summons has potential serious consequences tor the person who is commanded to appear before the court. Th ose cons eq uenc es may lead to tha t indi vidua l being impr isoned. Th ose are se rious cons eq uenc es.

As I was mention ing earli er, that variation appl ication has not been made perhaps for the reason that the individual was not quite sure of the procedures but perhaps more important ly, because of the expense involved, they have chosen not to seek counsel. I have indeed been involved in situations where the dollar amount owed in arrears was not very small. So again, that is another example of how our family law in the Province of Manitoba has evolved . As I mentione d earlier, maintenance enforcement is indeed perhaps easier to deal with than something like access.

Certainly the Government in this Bill is trying to address that particular problem. We have most recently seen that the frustration of people relating to their access to their children in many situations has led them to organ ize because of the increased expense of attem pting to enforce those access orders. Certainly, trying to enforce access is a much mor e difficult thing than enfor cing tha t maintenance order. lt is indeed easy enough to have a garnishee order issued garnisheeing the defaulter's bank account, the defaulter's emplo yment income.

I might add that there are indeed individuals or litigants who sometimes even prefer to have a garnishee order against their emplo yment income so that it automatically is deducted from their pay cheque and directed to the Maintenance Enforcement Branch so they themselves do not necessarily have to go through the sometimes painful experience of preparing the necessary disbursement. 1913

Wednesday, October 5, 1988 This, I believe, is certainly the first step towards attem pting to develop a system to enfo rce that access that has been ordered. I certainly would add, as I am sure all Members would agree, that someone not complying with this particular provision of an order of the court is certainly in as serious a breach as someone not complying with the mai ntenance order.

With respect to Conciliation Services, this operation of the Government of the Province of Manitoba is indeed a capable one and is often used by counsel and by judges and does provide a valuable service if both sides are indeed ready and able to cooperate. I am certainly prepared to admit, Mr. Acting Speaker, that I have referred many matters to Conciliation Services as one of the procedures available to me as counsel , to one party or the other, to try to reach some sort of agreement between parties.

I am sure many lawyers in the Province of Manitoba look to this as a first step, look to attempting to reach a settlement between parties. By attempting to reach that settlement, we are attempting to ensure the smooth transition of the family. We are attempting to ensure that there is as little effect as possible on the children, that there is as little effect as possible on really what had been a family unit. May I also add that it certainly has an effect on legal costs.

If an agreement can be reached, if a separation agreement can be prepared and executed, then it certainly saves you the additional costs of preparing various court appl ications, motions, the appearances necessary, the cross-exam inations of affidavits, the prepara tion and consideration of court orders, the argument relating to those court orders, the preparation of Examinations for Discovery, the attendances on Examinations for Discovery, and the se indeed add incredibly to the cost of any type of litigation.

I sincerely bel ieve that counsel across Manitoba would sooner reach a settlement than to go on to these extra steps. Conciliation Services will indeed perform a valuable function, as I mentione d, if both parties are prepared to cooperate.

If both parties are not prepared to cooperate, then unfortunately I have found that it is a step, perhaps even a valuable step to be taken, but � unfortunately sometimes does not yield the results that , we would like to see. lt is for this reason that I think, when this Bill is referred to comm ittee, tha t the committee should look to the community-l ook to Winnipeggers, look to Manitobans-to provide their input into this Bill, because it begs for some certain creative means of changing to ensur e tha t it is accomplishing that which it is intended to accomplish.

Unfortunately, in many situations that I have certainly been involved in, it indeed is a sad day when two people who have shared many years, their lives, toge ther some shorter than others, who have had children who have shared those experiences, have felt that enough is enough and yet, in these last stages of being together, they fight bitterly. This is a circumstance that needs to be addressed by the Manitoba Legislature.

If people are prepared to work together, are prepared to cooper ate, then any type of pilot project will inde ed work its magic and come up with solutions, come up with sometimes creative solutions; but if people are not prepared to cooperate, if people a

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-1-51
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 1st hansardpdf 51.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a98bfe38b0d5bf8962e7d585d88a3addc84ff031

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