Manitoba Hansard — 31 May 1984 (Sitting 33B, 32nd Legislature, 3rd Session)

32-3-33b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 Third Session - Thirty-Second Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS 33 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable D. James Walding Speaker VOL. XXXII No. 338 - 8:00 p.m., THURSDAY, 31 MAY, 1984. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Manitoba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Second Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANSTET� Hon. Andy ASHTON, Steve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, Hon. John M. CAR ROLL, Q.C., Henry N. CORRIN, Q.C., Brian COWAN, Hon. Jay DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent DODICK, Doreen DOERN, Russell DOLIN, Hon. Mary Beth DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert ENNS, Harry EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. EYLER,Phil FILMON, Gary FOX, Peter GOURLAY, D.M. (Ooug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon.

Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J. Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOVNATS, Abe LECUYER, Hon. Gerard LYON, Q.C., Hon. Sterling MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. AI MALINOWSKI, Donald M. MANNESS, Clayton McKENZIE, J. Wally MERCIER, Q.C., G.W.J. (Gerry) NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte ORCHARD, Donald PAWLEY, Q.C., Hon. Howard R. PARASIUK, Hon. Wilson PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Myrna A. PLOHMAN, Hon. John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Vi e SCOTT, Don SHERMAN, L.R. (Bud) SMITH, Hon. Muriel STEEN, Warren STORIE, Hon. Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill USKIW, Hon. Samuel WALDING, Hon. D. James Constituency Ste.

Rose Spring field Thompson La Verendrye Minnedosa Rhine! and Gimli Brandon West Ellice Churchill St. Bon iface Aiel Elmwood Kildonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concordia Swan River Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Portage la Prairie Stur geon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson Charleswood St. James St. Johns Morris Roblin-Russell St. Norbert Assiniboia Gladstone Pembina Selkirk Transcona Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain· Bur rows Rossmere lnkster Fort Garry Os borne River Heights Flin Flon lnterlake Lac du Bonnet St.

Vital Party NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP IND NDP NDP NDP NDP IND NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP PC PC NDP PC NDP PC NDP NDP PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP NDP NDP NDP NDP PC NDP NDP NDP PC ND P PC NDP NDP NDP NDP

LEGIS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thuraday, 31 May, 1984. Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ENVIRONMENT AND WORKPLACE SAFETY AND HEALTH MA. CHAIRMAN, C. Sentoa: Committee, please come to order. We are still on item No. 2.(aXb) and (c), (1) and (2) in Its category - the Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr. Chairman, I had been In the process, and the Minister was giving me an answer, and my question is and was: Is the government in favour of the cottage development? MA. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister. HON. G. LECUYEA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The member would like me to say specifically, am I in favour of the cottage development? At this point in time, I don't know what the cottage development consists of because that is, as far as I know, not a question which has come down through the negotiation process to any specific resolve, to any specific degree between the parties involved. I think what I can say on this issue, I have given it some serious thought and I know that it is an Important issue, it is a complex issue, it is one that I personally am very concerned with. I know that it's been dragging for a fair bit of time.

I know that your government prior to this, in the previous term, had struggled with this particular issue. We are currently struggling with this particular issue at this point in time. I feel confident and hopeful that progress is being made for a number of reasons. First of all, the committee involving all parties on this issue is meeting on a regularly scheduled basis. There is a meeting next week. Second ly, as the member herself has mentioned before, there will be FEARO hearings which are going to give cause, I believe, to all the tech nical data revolving around this issue to surface.

As I said already, the parties involved are meeting and I believe they are meeting in good faith. I believe it would be really, I think, unethical on my part to sort of scuttle the negotiations that are going around, that are taking place among the parties involved in this issue, by taking a specific position in regard to any of the components of this issue which it does not boil down to a single component. But the overriding concern is the quality of the Red River.

We have, in the Department of Environment in the Province of Manitoba, specialized staff with skills and knowledge that can analyze the consultant's report and on that basis prepare our position to be presented at the hearing. Beyond that, I will not go in any further detail except to say to the official critic of the oppositon that when that report is prepared , I am willing to share it with the official critic, and he can share it with the members of the opposition and we can discuss it prior to the hearing as soon as that report is ready. That's as far as I will go. MRS. G.

HAMMOND: I understand that discussions are still going on. I heard what the Minister has said, but what we have before us now is that the impact statement has been filed by the Indian band , the hearings are going on for 60 days, the written briefs will be going on for 60 days, then the assessment panel will be reviewing the briefs and then they will decide if they need further study, if they need further input on the impact statement . The City of Winnipeg has indicated that 1hey are going to present a case to the assessment panel, and they are opposing the development.

What I find here is it's past the point of a lot of negotiation. What is happening here is there is going to be a decision made and I think it only fair that when we are dealing with the quality of water, the drinking water, for the citizens of Winnipeg that the Minister should be able to say if they planned to support the city with the brief that they are presenting.

I am not asking then for the way he is going to - if he is going to make other presentations, although if he won't tell me that, I will accept that, not willingly - but I do believe that the Minister owes it to us to tell this House whether the province is planning to stand behind the city on this issue, or if the city is going one way and the province Is planning to go another way. MA. CHAIRMAN: Accord ing to the rules, there Is a distinction between what the Minister has given, what advice he has given to some other body or entity and what advice he proposes to give.

Rule 357( 1Xcc) says that a question cannot be asked when it concerns what advice a Minister proposes to give the Crown, but may ask what advice he has given; in other words, things that he had done, he is answerable for, but things that he proposes to do, he need not be answerable for. MA. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, I think that the Honourable Minister is quite willing to answer the questions. I understand that the Chairman has to understand his role as being Chairman and see tha t the rules are follo wed. MR. CHAIRMAN: I just cited the rules. MR. A. KOVNATS: That's fair enough.

But I don't think that we are swaying from the rules and the Honourable Minister really has no qualms about answering the quest ions. If he do es, then I think that he will acknowledge that he feels that we are out of order In the line of questioning, but I don't think we've gotten to that stage. I think that we've had a very very good relationship up until now and I wouldn't want to see us bringing in the rules at this point to protect the Minister. He doesn't really need the protec tion that is being offered to him by the Chairman. 1427

Thu...U y, 31 lby, 1184 MR. CHAIR MAN: it's not the Chairman who is offering the protection. it's the rule that protects the Minister if he wants it. Mr. Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: First of all, I'd like to correct a comment made by the Member for Kirkfield Park in that the . . . Report has been filed with the FEARO. There will be hearings but these hearings are not - contrary to what I heard is that these hearings were going to go on for the next 60 days, in actual fact these hearings are not going to start before another 90 days. Therefore, that puts a different light on what I heard the member say.

That particular report has some 70- or-more mitigating factors which the department wants to look at, which the department and the province is going to prepare its report on and that's the one I've said I'm prepared to share with the members of the opposition when it is ready. In the meantime, it would be to a large extent speculative to say, well, we're going to support the position of the City of Winnipeg. We haven't seen it, nor has the member who raises the question seen that report.

We don't know how the City of Winnipeg, in that particular brief, is going to address each and every one of these 70 particular mitigating circumstances or issues raised in the . . . Report and I think we shall prepare our report independentl y. I expect that with the goal in the eni:l to protect the quality of the drinking water for Winnipeg, we will have some common ground with the City of Winnipeg but I just don't want to make that statement until we have seen their position. I think it would be irresponsible of me to say that. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Mr.

Chairman, the 60-day review is for written briefs and that started May 1st and ends August 1st. Then they will consider the briefs in relation to the impact study. So the briefs are being presented right now and they're being presented to the Shoal Lake Environmental Assessment Panel. HON. G.

LECUYER: The 60 days the member is referring to is the 60 days during which period the parties can respond or make factual corrections to the consultant's report, and it is after that, that the public hearings after a period of 60 days or a certain period of days after that, that the report will be reviewed and revised in accordance with the factual reports presented. it's only after that period that the public hearings will be taking place. So we are talking probably public hearings happening late fall, winter, at which time we will have our own brief prepared.

Perhaps we'll have a chance to see Winnipeg's brief. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Now, we're getting somewhere, Mr. Chairman. That's exactly what I'm talking about. it's the brief that the government will prepare now. The city will be preparing a brief on this impact statement. What I want to know . . . HON. G. LECUYER: lt's not a brief. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Well. whatever you want to call it - it's a brief, as far as I'm concerned. The city will be preparing a brief and presenting it on the impact study.

What I'm trying to find out is what the government will be presenting to this panel at this time, In this 60 days, and if they will be going along with the city's position which right now stands in opposition to the cottage development. HON. G. LECUYER: Essentially what the department is doing presently is reviewing in detail the report that the member makes reference to. In that sense, the province is doing exactly the same thing as the city is doing. The city is preparing a report.

That report, even though the member refers to it as if there was a report in existence, or the member refers to as a brief, it's a reaction to the report. That city position is not written at this point in time. They are analyzing the report and will react on the basis of their findings. We are going to do the same, and that is what I said. We would be prepared to share with the members across, like they would, the City of Winnipeg, we hope that they will do likewise with us. There hasn't been, to my knowledge, an official report - I repeat - prepared by the City of Winnipeg at this point in time.

There may have been a statement on the general approach of the City of Winnipeg, but tha t is not their written report in reaction to this consultant's report at this point in time. MRS. G. HAMMOND: I will just make one further comment on what the Minister has said. What I am understanding is the city is going to be setting - that they are going to present a proposal. As far as anyone can und erstand about the city's position, it has been the same pretty well since they sent out their brochure to the citizens of Winnipeg, trying to alert them to the problem they had. That was November, 1982.

We are now into - tomorrow will be June 1, 1984 - and what we have here is in this year, possibly, the Federal Government is going to come down with a solution. lt is imperative that the province not go its own way and the city go its way and we don't seem to be getting that message. lt looks to me and it looks to a lot of other people at this time that the province is planning to go its own way. As much as I am hearing a lot about consultation, I feel very nervous about our water supp ly when I feel that the province may not be supporting the city in their actions. HON. G.

LECUYER: Well, I don't know where the member gets the impression that the province may not be supporting the city In its actions. First of all, let's find out what they city's actions are. I might again point out to the member this pamphlet that she is referring to was put out by the City of Winnipeg, I believe the member said sometime in November or earlier last fall. I might also point out to the member, at that point, the City of Winnipeg was , not sitting at these negotiations. The City of Winnipeg has been and is now a party to the negotiations which it wasn't at that time.

So I might point out, going further back, that as I stated this afternoon, in fact in '78 or'79, the City of Winnipeg even went so far as saying at one time that it might agree to a cottage development based on certain conditions. We have travelled a certain distance since that time and, as I said, the negotiations are ongoing. 1428

Thuraday. 31 May, 1184 Furthermore, the member seems worrried that the Federal Government is going to all of a sudden make a decision. FEARO, I have to advise the member, is not a decision -making body and FEARO will be receiving the briefs and go through public hearings. I don't know when yet. As I say, I expect perhaps late fall, winter, and a report will emanate from that. There will be suggestions in that report. There cannot be any decisions in that report.

I presume that foll owing that report, the parties, through the negotiation process, may already have come to some understanding, in which case the whole FEARO hearings may not even take place. But if they do, the recommendations will then be waived by the parties through the negotiations. lt's not the FEARO Report that is going to be a decision on this issue. The member should realize that. So we're a long ways from a solution, I have to agree. MRS. G. HAMMON D: I believe tha t the Review Committee Report will weigh very heavily on how the Department of Indian Affairs makes their deci sion. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, a question to the Minister. If the City of Winnipeg is in opposition to the cottage development, would the Minister care to indicate how influential the Provincial Government's position would be on the final decision? If the province said we will not approve of any cottage development, would that have a fairly major impact on the final decision? MR. CHAIRM AN: The statement is an if, then, statement. lt's a hypothetical question. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr.

Chairman, may I point out to you that during the Estimates process, we are approving funds for a department to undertake actions on behalf of all of the people of Manitoba. Those funds are expended on the basis of certain policy directions. What we've been trying to find out tonight is what this government's policy is in regard to protecting the water supply of over half the citizens of this province, and, Sir, if we cannot ask what this Minister's policy is, then I suggest the Estimates process is useless. Now is that what you want to turn it into, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: No. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Good, then will you allow the Minister to answer my question? MR. CHAIRMAN: Formulate your question in such a way that's in accordance with the rules of this meetings. MR. D. ORCHARD: Point out which rule I have violated in asking that question, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: Rule 357( 1)(g), "A question may not be asked which is hypothetical." MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, may I attempt to rephrase the question so it meets with Chairman Santos' approval? MR. CHAIRMAN: If it meets with the rule, yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: Yes, we know how you live by the rules in the New Democratic Party. Mr.

Chairman, I ask the Minister, does he believe the provinces opinion to be valued by those reviewing the decision as to whether the development should proceed ? MR. CHAIRMAN: That's another question that violates another rule. 357(1 )(f) "A question oral or written must not contain an expression of opinion." MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, may I try it again. MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, try and try. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: A question asks for information. If you ask information, you get it. HON. A. ADAM: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIRMAN: A point of order is being raised by the Minister of Government Services. HON. A. ADAM: Yes, the point of order is that the Member for Pembina, in all due respect , is attempting to get into an argument on the rules of procedure with the Chairman. You know, it seems to me that that's out of order. I don't think that members are to pose questions to the Chairman; they should pose questions to the Minister. I think that's entirely out of order. If he wishes to challenge, that's up to him. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr.

Cha irman, does the Minister feel that the provincial position can be influential in the final decision that will be made on the cottage development? HON. G. LECUYER: I suppose that the first thing that I could say to that is one of the remarks made by the Chairman, that's hypothetical. I have made that comment and having said that will go on to say that I would hope that the position that the province has in this regard will have some bearing; just like I will hope that the other parties' position, and expect that the other parties' positions, will have some bearing on this issue.

I would like the members to stop putting this, you know, in which camp are you? Which side are you supporting? Who's supporting who? I think that we have taken a position, which I think all parties have in this regard, and I think all parties want essentially. I haven't heard, and wouldn't expect any one of the four parties to the particular issue to say that they would want to see the drinking waters of Winnipeg polluted. Now having said that, each one of the parties here has some particular goals to achieve besides that.

The province will be presenting a brief, and as stated before, will be looking in detail at the consultant's report and 1429

Thunciii J, 31 Mar, 1eN preparing its position. lt's not a question as, do we support all out the position, or the brief, that Winnipeg is going to prepare, having not even seen it? We will prepare our reaction to that report keeping in mind that the overall principle that will guide the preparation of our report is safeguarding the quality of the drinking water for Winnipeg.

Now beyond that I can only go into some of the past statements that were made by the previous Minister, that were made in official letters by the Premier of this province in regard to this issue, which state and restate loud and clear that basic position and the principle which is guiding the province on this particular issue. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, that is exactly the problem the Minister is presenting to us. lt is a pretty nebulous statement for the government to make that we're going to protect the quality of water of the City of Winnipeg.

The City of Winnipeg is prepared to say that we're going to protect the quality of our water and we believe the best way to do it is not to allow any development at Shoal Lake. That would seem to me to be an ideal position if the government wishes to protect the City of Winnipeg's water supply. That's a position they could take. They would support the major city in the Province of Manitoba. Their opinion should be influential to those who are making the decision. Good heavens, if the province's position is not influential then this government really doesn't throw much weight or carry much weight.

But I believe it does, that's why we would like to see a definitive statement. A definitive statement saying, as the City of Winnipeg is prepared to do, that they will not tolerate development on Shoal Lake, would add a great deal of weight and force to the City's position. Mr. Chairman, this is not an unusual position for this party, and this government to take. The former Minister of this department is one of the greatest champions of clean environment that I have ever heard. In opposition he protected us from everything.

As a matter of fact in speaking of the water supply of the City of Winnipeg, the former Minister of Environment constantly raised the issue of concern about asbestos cement water pipes delivering water in the City of Winnipeg and the potential health hazard from them. We've got members who want wilderness parks and you establish them to protect the environment of the park. You've got a government that's prepared to ban deve lopment, or is cons idering ban nin g development in the Grassie Provincial Park to preserve the environment. You see this is what is frustrating.

On one hand they want to protect the environment in every way, but when it comes to the City of Winnipeg, the water supply for 600,000 people, we have motherhood statements, and we appear to have a government that's not prepared to back up the City of Winnipeg in their efforts to have this development stopped. You know, Mr. Chairman, the problem is, and I pointed this out to the Minister of Highw ays and Transportation and it's one of the problems this government has. When they were in opposition they made promises to people and to groups of people.

One of them - (Interjection) - the Mem ber for lnkster has just identified and confirmed the problem they've got. They had promises to the Native people in this province that if they received their support last election things would happen. They are caught in their own election promises because the Native people delivered for them. You bet they did. Now when the Native people come to this government and say we want to put in a cottage development, this government is caught between what the Member for lnkster just said of keeping their promises to them and protecting the water supply of the City of Winnipeg.

That's your problem, that's your problem, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: A point of order being raised. What is your point of order? MR. D. SCOTT: My point of order is I think it is quite improper for a member to intone motives on other members of the Assembly, or of the committee, and the Member for Pembina has clearly just said that we made some sort of a commitment to the people of Shoal Lake, the Native people living on Shoal Lake, which isn't even in Manitoba, that they were going to be allowed to develop a cottage development which was absolute nonsense. He knows it. lt's nothing but political grandstanding.

The committee would be able to move along much quicker and much more effectively, and with much better decorum if the Member for Pembina would get off some of his high horses. MR. CHAIRMAN: That doesn't constitute a point of order. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now, Mr. Chairman, that's the problem the Minister's got and he inherited it. I'm not blaming him. He inherited it. He inherited from the Minister that's in this committee tonight that had this department before.

They're afraid to make a definitive statement that they do not want cottage development on the Shoal Lake Indian Reserve, because they don't want to offend the Native people to whom they have held out great promise. That's the problem they've got and I think that is a problem because we're not talking about a small matter. We're talking about a water supply that's been in place, that is probably one of the highest quality one, the least cost for treatment costs in North America. lt's one of the best. lt serves over half the people of Manitoba.

What the City of Winnipeg and its residents deserve from this government is not motherhood statements, but some statements of support at a time when that support would be very influential in stopping that development from going ahead with the potential damage to Winnipeg's water supply that is there. No question that it's there. Without that kind of commitment, the City of Winnipeg, representing over half the population of this prMince, is left in limbo.

Surely a government that creates wi.lderness parks and cries about protecting the environment could take this one step and make a definitive statement and show some leadership as the City of Winnipeg has done on this issue. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Pembina needs a reminder of the rule that says that a question may not raise a matter of policy too large to be dealt with within the limits of an answer to a question. The Honourable Minister. 1430

Thursday, 31 May, 1184 HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to say to the Member from Pembina, who says that he doesn't want any motherhood statements; first, I would like to tell him that I just heard a whole lot of mothe rh ood statements in his particu lar comments just prior to now, and I would think that if the Member for Pembina doesn't want any motherhood statements, I also am not prepared to give him any responsible comments.

If the City of Winnipeg is that sure, even before having prepared its response to the consultant's report, that no matter what, in spite of the fact that the consultant's report might say that some type of development might be possible without damaging the quality of the water in any way, we don't even know at this point if the City of Winnipeg is going to take that position in its report, so it would be absolutely irresponsible on my part just to go and give you a motherhood statement of that sort that you're looking for.

I said we will take the responsible approach, make our detailed analysis of the consultant's report and prepare our brief in consequent and that will be the answer by which I will stand here tonight, not into some kind of motherhood irresponsible statement. MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't understand why we use motherhood and not fatherhood. MR. D. ORCHARD: Then, Mr. Chairman, what we've seen is a Minister that's not prepared to show any leader ship. HON. G. LECUYER: We'll see. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.(a)( 1) - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think we can move on to another aspect of the environment problems that we have. MR. CHAIRMAN: Can we pass 2.(a)( 1)? MR. A. KOVNATS: No, I don't think so, Mr. Chairman. I think that I would like to move on to mosquito control and the spraying of cankerworms in the City of Winnipeg and in the outlying district. Can the honourable Minister advise what involvement the Provincial Government has got in the spraying or the control of mosquitoes? I shouldn't say the spraying, because we seem to be in agreement here.

When it comes to the control of Western Equine Encephalitis, sprayings seemed to have been required, but I'm not sure whether it's required at this point. What control do we have now on the control of mosquitoes and what is the government's involvement in the control of mosquitoes and can kerworms? HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the Member from Niakwa is refe rring to the statements made in the House not so long ago in term s of our revised approach to mosquito monitoring and surveillance.

We have indicated that we were separat ing the question of data collect ion, data analysis and decision making in this regard and have identified the persons to do so, rather than relying on one particular committee and asking everything of it. Perhaps overburde ning it with all aspects of all three inputs here; data collec tion, data analysis and recommendation to the decision makers. That's what we have announced and that is what is being put in place, with the Minister of Health having named those persons who are responsible for doing the data analysis and the data colle ction is taking place. MR. A.

KOVNATS: That's not quite what I asked the Honourable Minister. I got an answer telling me that data collection is taking place and that there's an analysis of the mosquitoes. I don't care to be counting the mosquito es or how many mosquitoes we've got, what control do we have on them? Whether we've go 100 or 1 million or 10 million, how are we planning to control the mosquitoes?

I know that the Minister had made some statements concerning larvaci ding, which has been In effect for a long time and the Min ister took credits for possibly what he thought was a new approach to the control of mosquitoes. lt wasn't a new approach, but I would hope that the Honourable Miniter would give us some idea as to what control we will be implementing to control mosquitoes and not just the counting of them and telling people how many mosquitoes are around, because that's beautiful control. HON. G.

LECUYER: If the member is ref erring to the question of nuisance mosquitoes, I've said before the ques tion of control of nuisance mosqui toes is a municipal responsibility and as far as I know the mapping and larvaciding program that the member refers to, as having been in existence at all time, started last year with some financial assistance through the Jobs Fund and we are carrying it on this year as a program financed through the department. That I'm aware of, it didn't take place before that on that basis.

Other than that we have a role to play in educating the public in terms of what personal measures they can take to protect themselves. Now, if the member refers specifically to what is taking place in the City of Winnipeg, the member knows full well that the city, as any other municipali ty, submits its spray program to the department and uses chemicals that are approved through the Federal Department of Agriculture and then proceeds to carry on its own spray program with little of a role that the department can play in that regard.

If the member refers to in the future; we are talking in terms of putting in place provincial pesticide use permits, which recently - in fact during this month - is with the draft regulation that is being sent out to the municipal bodies and to the various organizations interested in this particular area. I believe that we can pass a copy of that draft regulation to the member, so that he can, as well, refer to it. MR. A. KOVNATS: Well, there's quite a bit on this thing - my good ness I just read the whole thing - I seem to be a very fast reader. But anyway, Mr. Chairman, I can't really look at it.

I guess I should have asked for it before. I just didn't realize that there was anything such as this available and I will, at my leisure, have a look 1431

Thunday, 31 May, 1114 at it and if something is not to my liking, I'll certainly bring it up to the Honourable Minister during question period and he won't be able to make reference to, "Why don't you wait until we get into my Estimates?" I really don't have too many more questions on the mosquito problem, although I know the best way of handling mosquitoes is how the Member for Churchill had advised - you just take one hand and you slap the hell out of it with the other. I think that the Honourable Member for Kirkfield Park has a few questions she would like to ask on mosquito control. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Kirkfield Park. MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes, I'm sorry I maybe didn't hear or understand. Does the city not need permission from the province to do spraying of mosquitoes? HON. L. LECUYER: The only requirement in the act now is that they file an Environment Impact Study . MRS. G. HAMMOND: Yes, so the province, at this time, doesn't have a veto on that? HON. L. LECUYER: No. MR. D. ORCHARD: Is this the area where we can discuss the transportation, the personnel transferred from the Department of Highways? Is this the allocation it's in? HON. G. LECUYER: I'm sorry, I didn't understand. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Is this the allocation where we can discuss the transfer of the three safety groups from the Department of Highways? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: The answer is yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: Okay. Then could the Minister indicate that under Salaries where last year it was 2.9, it's down to 2.6 and part of the Hig hways and Transportation transfer of $1 46,000 would be salaries? There obviously must be some reduction in staff in the Environmental Control Services to achieve say $300, 000 to $350,000 reduction in the salary bill. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr.

Chairman, the information that I'm being given is that the only difference is due to the extra pay period for last year. MR. D. ORCHARD: Is the Minister then telling me that Line 1 under Salaries, Environmental Control Services, there's the same numb er of staff this year as last year, including the addition of the three from Highways and Transportation? HON. G. LECUYER: I understand the member is referring to the Environmental Management Services and it's in a different line here than what he's referring to. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, then I'll wait for that line, Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIRMAN: lt will be under Item No. 2.(b). HON. G. LECUYER: Would the member ask his question again and I . MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, I was under the understanding that the three people from Highways was under (aX1), but you indicate now it's under actually (bX1). HON. G. LECUYER: Yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: Okay then, why isn't there a greater increase than there is there then? Like you've got three more people in the Salary category this year over last year. Were some people let go out of that division to be replaced by? HON. G.

LECUYER: This would show as a reconciliation with last year, so the figures for 1983-84 would have been reconciled to show the transfer as if it had taken place last year, therefore the changes for this year would not be reflective of the particular transfer of dangerous goods. MR. D. ORCHARD: Okay, that's fine. I see what has happened in the Reconciliation Statement.

Can the Minister indicate the desire to remove a group of three with some expertise in the transportation of dangerous goods from a Transportation Department and putting them in his department where there is no transportation expertise to call on immedi ately within the department. What was the reason for the move? HON. G. LECUYER: As I stated in my opening remarks this afternoon, the government, in the Estimates process, felt that it would be wise to put the issue of dangerous and hazardous goods to be co-ordinated in one department.

In fact the member may have noticed on the Order Paper, and if he hasn't I'm drawing it to his attention today, there was a bill on the Order Paper today that is being brought forth, which is called "The Handling and Transportation of Dangerous Goods.

" Therefore that is one of the areas that will be considered during the course of the debates on the legislation and the legislation is intended to back up that particular change, which is of the transportation of dangerous goods to the department, which is in the process of implementing a full program, having to do with the management of hazardous and dangerous waste materials. MP D. ORCHARD: Will this new act then replace The Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act that we passed, i believe last Sess ion? HON. G. LECUYER: The member might recall well, that we did pass

an act to that effect last Session, and that at the end of the Session we tabled The Dangerous Goods Handling Act. The act being introduced this year is in actual fact, a combination of the two. The transpor tation of dangerous goods had not been proclaimed at this point, so in effect, you are correct. 1432

Thunday, 31 May, 1884 MR. D. ORCHA RD: Then under what legislative authority is the transpor tation of dangerous commodities being monitored in the province? We're, in effect, in a legislative no man's land without the previous act being proclaimed and before the new act, which is a combination act, is passed and proclaimed. HON. G.

LECUYER: Well, whether we have or have not proclaimed the legislation of last year, or whether we are combining with the handling of dangerous goods now changes very little because the federal Transport of Dangerous Goods legislation, at this point in time, hasn't been proclaimed either for the very fact that the regulation to implement that legislation has not been adopted federally.

If I haven't bevn clear on that, although I didn't think that I stated that the legislation hadn't been adopted federally because it has, but there hasn't been all of the regu lations at this point in time put in place to make the act actually implementable. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well, it's my understanding, Mr. Chairman, there are no federal regulations tabled yet, are there? HON. G. LECUYER: I believe that there are some regulations in place now, but the full complement of regulations - almost none, I'm given to understand.

Also, I might add that in bringing in the transportation of dangerous goods as part of a new act, the one passed in the last Session, of course, would not be repealed until the passage of the new. MR. D. ORCHARD: lt hasn't been proclaimed. HON. G. LECUYER: lt hasn't been proclaimed anyway, that's correct. MR. CHAI RMAN: 2.(aX1) - the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The three people who were responsible for the drafting of the original Dangerous Goods Act, is it the intention of the Minister to keep that expertise in place?

This is not a transfer from one department with a finite end to the jobs - are those jobs secure? HON. G. LECUYER: We have transferred positions, Mr. Chairman, but the positions themselves, although transferred to the department, will be modified or could be modified as the implementation of the overall hazardous and dangerous goods programs evolve within our department with the exception of the secretarial position which would necessarily stay. Yes. We need that secretarial support. MR. D. ORCHARD: Okay, then just let me get it straight. The secretarial position is one that is going to be transferred and . . .

HON. G. LECUYER: Confirm. MR. D. ORCHARD: . . . and the person filling that one. But I believe there is a director and then Mr. Shafransky, I don't know what his position was, but he was the ... HON. G. LECUYER: He was the legislative analyst who has worked In the preparation of that legislation. MR. D. ORCHARD: So I take it that those two positions aren't necessarily secure for the people currently holding them? Is this what the Minister is saying? I'm not putting words In his mouth, I'm just asking him. HON. G. LECUYER: In essence, that's what I said. MR. D. ORCHARD: Far be it for me to defend Mr.

Sh afransky, but I would question the Minister as to why, with obviously some expertise in place, I don't know whether his position was a director and then Mr. Shafransky as a legislative analyst - with some expertise in place in the problems involved in the transportation of dangerous goods, why would those people not be retained in the transfer? lt would seem to me that if you're not going to retain them that this transfer could be interpreted as a de-emphasis by the government on the safety aspect and transportation of dangerous goods.

That certainly is not the kind of public impression this government has tried to leave with the people, but if the expertise Is not going to be retained, I think that's the only conclusion one can draw from this transfer. HON. G. LECUYER: I want to make sure that there is no misunderstanding. I haven't indicated that the persons will not be retained. The department already has the handling of dangerous goods.

The department already has the disposal of hazardous materials for which it is developing a program which will come in place in time and what it is acquiring through that is a portion of that overall program, I would say less than a major portion of that program. We will adjust according to the needs as that program evolves, and that is why I'm saying we will look at that as the program evolves. But for the time being, as I say, the positions have been transferred and the staff has been transferred.

Now whether the member is asking me to indicate whether we will - well, first of all, I don't think at any time any Minister would give a commitment that any particular individual that he has on staff would retain that particular position. No one is there to be able to make that kind of assumption anyway. MR. D. ORCHARD : Right, but in this case, Mr.

Chairman, and I appreciate that the department has expertise in disposal and handling at industrial work place, handling and disposal of hazardous goods, but transportation of dangerous goods is a very complex issue. lt's something that was discussed probably over a six-year period between the Federal Department of Transportation and its provincial counterparts across Canada. The drafting of the act took considerable time as it took quite some time provincially. The regulations aren 't drafted. There is sizable expertise In the transportation field involving dangerous goods.

I can't agree with the Minister that he necessarily has the expertise already In the department that he needs to provide the kind of protection and policy direction that the province needs in the transportation of dangerous goods. That's why I'm Interested In pursuing the matter of whether the expertise that is in place will remain 1433

Thureday, 31 May, 1984 available for the benefit of the department and the benefit of the people of Manitoba. HON. G. LECUYER: I don't know what the member sees as a problem because it was started by saying that the transfer has taken place. We have transferred the position and for the time being these persons have been transferred as well, and the expertise, therefore, has been transferred. I would also like to add that the Department of Hig hways will continue to play a role in that area as well.

The transportation of dangerous goods is not going to be something that the Department of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health is going to assume independently of the Department of Highw ays. There will be, obviously, ongoing close correlation. A standing or a permanent committee of staff is already in place to make sure that will be ongoing, that the Department of Highways has certain expertise that will be continued to be required even though that particular function has been transferred to the Department of Environment and Workpl?ce Safety and Health.

The additional comment that I would like to say is the Department of Hig hways itself was of the opinion that the aspect of transportation of dangerous goods was best placed with the overall handling, disposal and all other aspects of hazardous and dangerous goods to make sure that the co-ordination was there. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Gladstone. MRS. C. OLESON: I was just going to ask the Minister and he has already answered part of it in the answer to the Member for Pembina about the correlation between the Hig hways Department and his department. One aspect I was concerned with Is the truck drivers.

I mean it's all very fine to have all kinds of regulations on what you haul and where and when and why, but it's the drivers that essentially are the key to the whole thing. I was wondering if there is any liaison with the Hig hways Department with the trucking association, for instance, on some training for truck drivers. HON. G. LECUYER: I just want to make sure that they understand what the member is asking, so that they understand the act and the provisions of the act. MRS. C. OLESON: Partly that, Mr.

Minister, and partly some knowledge of the type of goods they are hauling in case of emergencies and that sort of thing, also just plain training in the handling of the vehicle that they are driving because a lot of people can tell some horrendous stories of being involved on the hig hway with truck drivers that are not too proficient. I am not knocking them because it's hard work, but a lot of them I don't think have any training, and particularly when they are hauling some thing in th e line of dangerous goods, I think they do need some more training than perhaps they get. HON. G.

LECUYER: I don't know if this answers fully the member's question and concern here, but I think the overall thrust of the changes to the Workplace Safety and Health legislation which, in essence, will help all workers in the workplace to be more familiar, whether it is with the equipme nt they are working with or the tools they are working with or the risks on the job.

That's the type of training through the Workplace Safety and Health committees that is intended to be provided to the workers, whether it is in a particular workplace or whether it is a worker or a truck driver working for a particular company handling dangerous goods.

Through The Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, the truck driver will be familiar or at least know what are the substances that he is hauling through the manifest system, which will follow the dangerous goods from the time they are created to the time they are finally disposed of through a manifest system that will have to be filled each time these substances move from, whether it is the manufacturing plant to the plant where they are going to be used and a process of one type or another, or whether irs moving from that plant as a waste substance to its final disposal point in which circumstances, undergoing these various steps, there is, as part of the manifest system which is being developed federally and which will be used as a standard form throughout the country, a number of pages each time.

A part of the manifest is therefore filled and sent in according to the provisions which are in the act. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for lnkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to raise a couple of issues here. I don't intend to - say at least go after my Minister, give him a little break here for a minute, I suppose. I just want to raise some concerns that I have, I've expressed before in the House, and that I've expressed to the Minister.

I am quite confident that the Minister is following up on these suggestions that not only come from myself but of other members as well, and this is the whole idea of spraying in our environment to control bugs. lt kind of makes you think that the City of Winnipeg listens to the yet unnamed radio show on CBC radio on Sunday or every Saturday morning and listens to that record they played for a couple years of "I Hate Bugs." But it's the issue that we can deal with insects, in particular, in our environment that may be unpleasant to us, even though they are an integral part of our ecological zone we live in that we can just, at will, go into our environment with no consequences and spray chemicals, in particular.

We are moving into biocides now as well, biologically-based insecticides, and I have very strong reservations of us, as a society and as a government, permitting this. Particularly with the exemptions as they presently are provided for under The Clean Environment Act for the City of Winnipeg, where we have over half the population, and yet that is the area that we as a province have years and years ago, when the legislation was drawn up, exempted our responsibility. I think that we should be looking very seriously at that.

Now we have the city, where there is no health threat, no health threat whatsoever, with cankerworms and going about on days like today when we are saved by a breeze, they are not allowed to spray. But there is 1434

Thursday, 31 May, 1984 no question of health hazard here.

In my own feel ing, there is even questionable question of health hazard, and certainly as far as one considers epidemiology in even with the insecticides used last year to control mosquitoes with the fear of an outbreak of Western Equine Encephalitis, we are now in a situation where there is absolutely no health threat to human beings by cankerworms, and yet the city is out once again spraying our neighbourhoods and spraying the rivers and streams and the property along the rivers and streams to try and control an insect which to many people is quite unpleasant.

I can agree, it's not pleasant to have to go out your back door and sort of make your way through the cobwebs to your car or out to the backyard, but the trees are very rarely, I would suggest, killed by them and cer tainly wouldn't be killed by the insects alone unless the trees were already suffering from another disease, because even if the leaves are eaten off by the cankerworms the trees releaf themselves. They did last year; they will in future years. lt is my understanding that we are now at the height of the cankerworm cycle so that next year it will not neces sarily be a problem.

I have fears that when we continually get into spraying programs year after year we are going to level off the populations at a very high level, like many experts are now claiming has happened in New Brunswick, with the spraying of the spruce budworm where at one time you had dramatic cycles in their population from high population levels to very low population levels, they have now levelled off at a relatively high level and the insects have become more and more immune to the chemicals.

Now methoxychlor , which is currently being sprayed by the City of Winnipeg, I have gone and looked up some defi nitio ns of it - some of the chemical composition itself looks more like an algebraic forumula to me than it does of methoxychlor - but it recog nizes the symptoms. I recognize that this is a chemical of a very very low level of toxicity and it's supposed to not be toxic to human beings. lt's very much in order. We have ... MR. CHAIRMAN: The member has only a time of 30 minutes. MR. D. SCOTT: I have only been going five minutes, Mr. Chairman. I could go for 30 minutes very easily on this issue, Mr.

Chairman. I shall not do that to the comm ittee, although it is an issue that as far as importance to many people in our society they would wish I would go for several times at 30 minutes. lt's not to be laughed at. The people, when I was in Finland and Sweden again last year, they could not believe that a government was allowed to spray aerial spraying or ground fogging urban areas. lt's just unheard of over there. They can't believe that a government would be able to get away, be it a city, federal or a provincial level of government.

More and more people here are starting to question the wisdom of this spraying too. Although methoxychlor is not supposed to be toxic, in the

definitions here, I'm reading from one called, Toxic and Hazardous Industrial Chemicals Safety Manual. They state that the symptoms of someone who is exposed to this are headaches, stagge ring, nausea, vomiting, lethargy and convulsions. They exercise particular care in using it. They state it's less toxic than DOT.

Those who are exposed to it, be it in manufacture or application, various safeguards that they should be taking, and when it talks about harmful effects, it says in another book, "The Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals," it states that there are none known to humans, which is contradicted by the previous one of the Toxic and Hazardous Chemical Safety Manual and this latter one goes on to say, "In animals" - and I've always thought that human beings were part of the animal species - "it is normal to have trembling, convulsions, kidney and liver damage, even though it is supposed to be non-carcinogen ic." We have a large number of people in our society who have respiratory problems and with those respiratory problems they are affected by almost any kind of spraying, whatsoever.

So, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to raise this issue. lt hasn't really been raised yet, and although the Member for Niakwa mentioned it in the House the other day, it has not come up for much of a discussion in the House thus far, and I would just want to let the Minister know, as he well does, of my support on taking stronger measures in putting more regulations on spraying and when one can spray .

We already announced some measures a couple of weeks ago in regard to spraying where there is danger to human beings. lt seems now that we have to make some moves on spraying where there is no health danger whatsoever by the insects towards human beings. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair thanks the Member for lnkster. The committee thanks him too. 2(a)( 1 )- pass. 2.(a)(2) - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: I thought the Honourable Minister was going to reply to the Honourable Member for lnkster. You weren't going to reply? Then I have a few questions.

Before I get down to rendering plants, which I think we will discuss under 3. Clean Environm ent Commission, I want . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: We can go there if we pass this one. MR. A. KOVNATS: No, I'm not ready to pass this one, Mr. Chairman, for many reasons, one of them Is that we all have the right to speak and I think that I'm going to exercise that right to speak at this point. I want to find out if we have any PCB stored in Manitoba, the amount of PCBs that we've got stored in Manitoba. I want to know about the danger and the level of asbestos that is still involved in the City of Winnipeg schools.

I want to know concerning the pollution from the Bronze Foundry in the Weston School area, whether that's been cleaned up. The Honourable Minister made some reference to it before. I want to know whether we have any permanent storage facilities for PCB s and permanent storage facilitie s for materials that are carcinogenic. I don't really know what it means, but I've heard somebody else mention it. I thought I would like to ask the Honourable Minister If he would be prepared to give us a report on all of that. I would like 1435

Thuraday. 31 May. 1114 to find out from the Honourable Minister - I'm giving all these questions at one time. I hope he can answer them ... MR. CHAIRMAN: For the purpose of efficiency , can the mem ber ask them one at a time. MR. A. KOVNATS: All right, then I'll hold back until we get an answer on what I have there. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To address the member's question in regard to PCBs, there has been an inventory conducted by the Federal Environment of all the PCBs in the transformers in the province.

The transformers, as they are replaced, are stored by Winnipeg Hydro or Manitoba Hydro. Those that are still in use and have PCBs within them are so labelled, therefore we have a full inventory of the transformers in use in the province that do still contain PCBs. As those are replaced they are replaced with transformers which do not contain PCBs. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr.

Cha irman, I'm astound ed because I remember the dange r, the importance of taking these transformers that were in use by the Manitoba Hydro, and it seemed to me at that point and this was four or five years ago, when we were going to replace them immediately because there was such a danger, such a big issue, that was brought about in the Legislature concerning the PCBs. I'm astounded to find out that there are still some in service. Can the Honourable Minister bring us up to date as to how many are in service still? HON. G.

LECUYER: I don't know if I can provide the detailed information to the mem ber in terms of how many are still in service, although there are some still in service. I want to indic ate to the mem ber that these are sealed transformers, and as I indicated before, in some circumstances they are still in service as back up transformers. As they are being replaced gradual ly, they are being replaced with transformers that do not contain PCBs. In the meantime these that do and are coming off stream are being stored by both Manitoba Hydro and Winnipeg Hydro. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I'm glad that the Honourable Minister has given me the assurance that these sealed transformers will never become unsealed because I would have a great fear if that was happening. Where are these transformers being stored at this point? HON. G. LECUYER: I haven't got that information. I could get it for the member, but I'm afraid I can't give it to him tonight. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you very muc h to the Honourable Minister. lt is important information.

Do we have any plans now for a location in the Provi nce of Manitoba to store carcinogenic or cancer-causing materials, PCBs, anything else of a pollutant type of material that other provinces won't accept? Are we planning now for a permanent location to store these type of materials? HON. G. LECUYER: That's a tall order, Mr. Chairman. The Member from Niakwa is ref erring to almost all pollutants from carcinogens to PCBs.

There are a wide variety of known carcinogens, suspected carcinogens, ar.d others that we probably don't even suspect that might be or others that are not even in existence today that probably will be next week, next month. Who knows? I think the best way I can answer that, Mr.

Chairman, is to say that this is all part of this management of hazardous waste substances that we have referred to oftentimes, that the previous Minister of Environment brought on stream and has talked about in the House a nu mber of times which is still In its first phase or nearing the end of its first phase. lt started with the symposium last spring of which the dangerous goods handling is part of, which was the subject of Clean Environmnet Commission hearings during the winter, which is to be foll owed by further hearings from the Clean Environment Commission before we go Into the second stage which will then start dealing with the type, the very thing that he poses in his question, the type of - how will I address the word tht.t I'm looking for - the method by which these substances can be finally disposed of and there is not a single method for all of these substances. lt think it's a combination. it's a whole program therefore that has to be put in place.

When I say the management of hazardous waste materials, because there are a variety of these materials, they cannot all be disposed of in the same man ner, therefore it is a comprehensive program that has to be developed, the method that has to be chosen and the site that is part also of that third phase of that program which is where we can bring it all together. In the meant ime, we have, as part of that program as well, put together, comple ted or almo st completed an inventory of all of the hazardous waste substances being generated in the province.

Perhaps staff can indicate to me how extensive that list is at the moment. We are somewhere in th e area of some 800 businesses in Manitoba that do handle some of these hazardous substances. The list itself would be a fair bit longer I think, 3,200 substances have been identified and are part of the inventory. MR. A. KOVNATS: I wish the honourable Minister hadn't given me that information. lt's kind of mind boggling, but I guess we just can't close our eyes to it. lt has to be looked after.

Can the honourable Minister bring us up to date on whPt's happening in the polluted area around the We .on School that was caused by the foundry and wf.o paid for the removal of that earth? HON. G. LECUYER: The Weston School Division has agreed to a number of mitigating measures to assure the the lead levels at Weston School will not return to previous high levels. We paid for the removal.

The school area was cleaned up last summer. lt included the resurfa cing of the playground, repainting the trim - a lot of the lead, it was established, was from the old paint that was on the building - and we are presently 1436

Thuradey, 31 May, 1984 sampling the lead level in the air at Weston School and it is established that at this point in time it is a very low level. We will resume ground sampling when the mitigating measures that I've referred to are in place. As well we propose to do monitoring of playgrounds in different parts of the city during the summer. MR. A. KOV NATS: Are there any other locations in the city other than the Weston School area that we are monitoring and checking out the lead level dangers throughout all of the City of Winnipeg and throughout the province?

I know that Weston School, it appears, is an ongoing thing because we've had an experience there. Do we have any experience anywhere else? HON. G. LECUYER: There have been several other locations that have been sampled and so far there are no other locations that have presented any problem at this point in time, but as I've indicated as well, other areas will be also sampled during the course of the summe r. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Can the Minister bring us up to the point now where are we experiencing any dangerous asbestos levels in any of the schools or has all the asbestos been changed to a more stable type of insulation? HON. G. LECUYER: The member is asking this question 1 suppose because the asbestos has been in the past, or is known to be, when inhaled, a substance that has been established could be related to diseases and in particular cancer or what is referred to as asbestosis. There is an ongoing program in the department monitored by the Work place Safety and Health officers.

Therefore it's an area that would normally come under a different number, but I might as well answer the full question at this point in time. The program operates basically in four different phases. That of identification, the evaluation of the problem, consultation between staff and the people involved with the operation and a control operation. The identification itself include s: responding to concerns or requests or complaints from both management or workers and to confirm the presence of asbestos, if such is.

This has been ongoing since 1979 with approximately some 2,000 analyses having been performed by the provincial lab since then. The evaluation consists of assessment of the hazards to those who might be occupationally exposed to the asbestos through their work in order to determine the extent of the damage that they might be exposed to.

If the evaluation performed indicates risks, high risks of exposure, discussions are conducted with the management and the workers to detail with them the type of control measures that would be best in the particular case in question. lt may be that there's a possibility of enclosing the fibres, it may be that there's a possibility that it is necessary to go as far as removing, encapsulating - there are different approaches to different situations depending of the severity of the degree on the basis of the evaluation performed. I don't know if I've fully answered the question the member ... MR. A.

KOVNATS: Fairly much. I would just like to bring to the attention of the Minister; I have some concerns concerning the asbestos fibre danger and the PCB s and the danger with Manitoba Hydro, particularly with the new legislation that is coming out about where somebody can refuse to work in the presence of any of this dangerous material if there's a hazard to their health in the workplace. I don't know how it's going to be handled and I don't think that I really want to get into it at this point, but I bring it to the Honourable Minister's attention that I have a great many concerns.

All right, the Honourable Minister wants to answer that. HON. G. LECUYER: In general terms, I think that I've answered the question, the concerns of the member by, in essence, describing to him how the program is conducted and also advising him that the program is ongoing and it has been for a number of years. In fact, it started when they were in government in 1979 and it's ongoing. MR. A. KOVNATS: I have some questions later on, but I'm just going to finish off a few little odds and ends at this point, concerning the recycling of garbage, and I'm not repeating an area that was brought up before.

I'm going to talk about the plastic bottles, the disposable bottles, the aluminum tins, these are things that have been causing us an environmental problem for all of these years. Can the Honourable Minister bring us up to date on regulations covering all of these things? Are we subsidizing anybody to go about and pick up these items because I understand the only place to recycle some of these items is in Calgary and you have to pick them up and take them out there? Do we have any place in Manitoba where we can recycle these ·items? HON. G.

LECUYER: As far as the bottles are concerned, there hasn't been any sense of a problem in that the bottles in use are mostly - whether it's the soft drink bottles or beer bottles - they are on a refundable basis and there has been, through ongoing discussion and voluntary controls imposed by the beverage industry, a limited number of cans put on the market with soft drinks.

The problem may soon be upon us to a greater degree as the aluminum cans come into use, the non-returnable containers, and up until now there hasn't been any volume sufficient to warrant or to make it attractive enough for an industry to get involved, although I think that we certainly have had a number of requests. We are encouraging developments in that regard. If there Is a problem, I suppose we have to say the problem exists really in the North, where there is a greater use of cans than in the south because of the transportation costs involved with bottles in the beverage industry.

I can also add, for the information of the member, that the question of pollution as a result of containers, especially non-returnable or refundable containers, is becoming of a greater concern throughout the country. In fact recently I received a letter, just a matter of a couple of weeks ago, from the Federal Minister of Environment telling me that this matter, this concern, h;is been brought to his attention by a number of provinces, suggesting that this be placed on the agenda 1437

Thursday, 31 May, 1884 at the next meeting of Ministers of Environment and Natural Resources, the CCREM Ministers, in the fall. I have replied to him, indicating that I supported this idea and I felt that it would be useful that a paper be prepared, or a first draft paper be prepared, for our discussion at that meeting.

I've also asked staff within my department to prepare a paper giving us a better insight of the nature of the problem within the province, the qua ntity of these non-returnables that are currently being accumulated in the environment, asking for figures in terms of the number of cans, not only the beverage and soft drink industry but the juices, the whole of the food industry, as well as the soft drink and beer industry.

I know the question of the use of aluminum cans in the brewing process is also becoming an in creasing concern and I have at this stage a paper which I am taking for the consideration of my colleagues and Cabinet in the near future, but I am not at liberty to reveal its contents nor is it by any means an indication that we are on the verge of making any decisions. But I want to indicate to the member that it Is In my estimation a very important question, one I think that is going to be increasingly a problem, one that I think will be a challenge to all of the provinces. MR. A. KOVNATS: We're kind of winding down.

We're getting down to where we can move on, but just one last item before we move onto the Mercury Agreement and we get down to that problem. A little while back we received a questionnaire, and it seemed it was an environmental questionnaire concerning the Legislature, and some of the questions were quite interesting, but I thought it was an awful waste of money. Can the Honou rable Minister bring me up to date as to what initiated the questionnaire that was circulated and for what reason did we circulate it?

Was there some health hazards, some danger concerning this building? lt seemed it was a ridiculous thing. We're always looking to save money and to put the money in the best place. What initiated such a ridiculous questionnaire? HON. G. LECUYER: I know that it may on the surface look as if it's a ridiculous questionnaire perhaps, but it was for a very real reason.

Some of the employees in this building, in fact some of the members of the Legislature, have been troubled ever since last fall through we don't know what particular substance that probably is in the air, or to which they are allergic to, but it has affected the health of a considerable number of people working in the building, seemingly on the east side of the building. So we wanted to determine to what extent this was a problem and that was the reason for the questionnaire. The problem is being addressed presently. MR. CHAIRMAN: Did ttie Member for Niakwa say that was the last question? MR. A.

KOVNATS: Yes, I did, and that's why I have my hand up because I came up with one more. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. MR. A. KOVNATS: May I pose the · question, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: By all means. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't know who the members were. I guess if it was members of the group that I belong to I probably would have known about it. I just kind of struck me by surprise. But you know if there Is � health danger, Mr. Chairman, I would think this health danger won't last more than another couple of years anyway for those particular members. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 2.(a)(1) -p ass; 2.(a)(2)-pass. 2.(b)(1) - pass; 2.(b)(2)-p ass. 2.(c)(1) - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Can the Honourable Minister bring us up to date as to the problems concerning mercury pollution and why we only have, I would think, a half a-secretary salary here, and whatever the Other Expenditures are and Recoverable from Canada of $10 5,000.00? Can the Honourable Minister bring us up to date? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr.

Chairman,tThis an agreement that was signed between the province and the Government of Canada to study and monitor the extent of mercury in the Churchill River Diversion Project. The agreement was signed on March of 19 83. So it is expected to, the agreement is for four years to conclude in '86, I believe, with a total budget of 760,000 shared on a 50-50 basis between the province and the Canadian Government. There are five objectives to the agreement.

The objectives of the agreement are to further investigate the mercury level in the water sediments and the effect that the mercury would have on the aquatic food chain along the whole of the diversion route, and to determine what the sources of the mercury input is in the diversion system, to research mechanisms whereby the mercury released, how it enters the food chain, to access the signif icance of these phenomena to future water management activities. And to advise the public the pu rpose, the progress, and the results of the studies undertaken.

And if the member refers to only half-a staff-year it's because the bulk of the work is done on a contractual basis. MR. A. KOVNATS: I wasn't too sure. I was kind of guessing at that $ 16,700.00. What really does that encompass? HON. G. LECUYER: That's approximately the half person that the member was referring to. MA A. KOVNATS: That's a-half-a-secretary then? HOH. G. LECUYER: No, no. MR. A. KOVNATS: That's a full secretary? HON. G. LECUYER: That's a half SMY of a, it's the program co-ordinators, the half-time of a professional person involvement. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Yes, is there any other mercury pollution in the province other than in the Churchill 1438

Thundey, 31 May, 1984 area that we're making reference to here? We're monitoring this Churchill area. Are we monitoring any other mercury problems for the fishing industry in the province? HON. G.

LECUYER: The member probably is aware and that was something that we have been informed of, and there has been in the news, and a problem ever since the '60s I believe where the presence of a certain amount of mercury has been established in the Red, the Assiniboine, the Souris, the Winnipeg rivers, basically all the rivers of southern Manitoba, and in some instances has been established that there were mercury levels slightly higher than the levels acceptable for human consumption. There has been ongoing monitoring of these river systems.

The problem is basically handled through public information, and to that effect if the member is an avid fisherman when he goes to buy his licence this year he will also receive one of these leaflets to inform him of the situation. lt's not a problem unless you're an avid and continuo us eater of fish from these particular bodies of water. Commercial fishing is all monitored for mercury, as the member perhaps is already aware, as a condition of sale by the Fresh Water Fish Marketing Corporation. MR. D. KOV NATS: I think we can pass this item, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRM AN: 2.(cX1)-p ass; 2.(cX2)-p ass.

Resolution 68: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty, a sum not exceeding $7,059,300 for Envir onment and Workplace Safety and Hea lth, Environmental Management for the fiscal year ending 31 st day of March, 1985- pass. I'm calling Item No. 3(a), Clean Environ ment Commission, Salaries, 3.(

b) Other Expenditu res - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOV NATS: Yes, I think at this point we will discuss the rendering plants in the Province of Manitoba. Happy days, here we go. The Honourable Minister had made some reference to it in the Legislature concerning the Burns Plant at Brandon. You know, I don't want to bring up the whole of the issue. He knows the problems there concerning the rendering of animals like deads in the Western region of Manitoba, as well as we do have an industry here in Winnipeg that renders deads. But I think that it's the Brandon area which will have no such facilities anymore.

I think that we have to prepare and not wait for the last minute until we've got a, you know, a truck load of deads and not knowing what to do with them after the plant is closed. it's not a hypothetical case, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm not saying any1hing. MR. A. KOVNATS: I was looking and I could almost see the lips moving and the words hypo starting it, you know, and I appreciate the . . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Will the member please come to the point. MR. A. KOV NATS: I thought I was getting to the point, Mr. Chairman.

But you know I just didn't want to be stopped on it because it is such an important part of it and it's just not hypothetical. There was some reference to it in the Chamber that it might have been hypothetical and the Minister said that he would be coming into his Estimates very soon, and I would like him to bring us up to date as to what plans are being made now when the Burns plant closes.

What are the contingency plans to look after the deads in that area because I'm told that it, you know, and I'm not trying to impress the Minister with my knowledge of what goes on in these rendering plants although I do appear to know quite a bit about it because it was very, very important, and I went out and I found out. lt costs about $1 .50 a mile to send a truck from Winnipeg out to Brandon, or places of that area. Somewhere in the area of about $600, you know, to take a trip out to Brandon and back with special equipment.

Can the Honourable Minister advise if they are doing anything to encourage the Brandon plant to keep up their rendering facility in Brandon? After we talk about this we'll talk about the rendering facilites in Winnipeg. HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, I guess what essentially I can say to the member - I could go on and agree with him that the rendering plant in Brandon does serve a significant portion of the province, western Manitoba, on the other hand it remains a fact. I'd like to correct one thing. Not every dead animal is dead because of disease for one thing. MR. A.

KOV NATS: Some of it's heart trouble, I unde rstand that. HON. G. LECUYER: Some may die from heart trouble, some may die from old age. We heard the Member for Pembina mentioned this afternoon, some died because of ... MR. A. KOVNATS: Loneliness. HON. G. LECUYER: . . . such situations as ice storms as we experienced recently and will create problems and circumstances . . . MR. A. KOV NATS: The Honour able Min ister of Government Services is going to be looking at that. HON. G.

LECUYER: But essentially what I would like to say is, first of all, there are parts of the province that have no rendering service now and they have to deal with that problem in the old-fashioned way. Now the question of closing of Burns in Brandon, the member raises that question as if this had been a long-standing knowledge that we had of this situation. I can only respond by saying I have no pat alternative to the question or pat answer. I can say we've been apprised of the problem.

We shall have discussions with the industry, especially those sectors that are the prime users of the rendering plant now, to try and determine whether there is not a viable alternative possible, but I have no answer to give you at this point in time. MR. A. KOV NATS: Well, I hope that the Honourable Minister would take it as a suggestion that we do have 1439

Thul'8dlly. 31 May. 1184 people in the rendering business here in Winnipeg who are capable of going out to Brandon. I hope, you know as a last resort, I would like to see the plant maintained in Brandon for the good of the all the people that are working there and for the good of the community because it is a big part of the community in Brandon. I'm not looking to make plans now to close the plant and I hope, if there's any possibility of keeping it open, that the government of the Province of Manitoba will do everything they can to try and encourage Burns to keep it open. I'm not quite finished on this point.

Now it comes down to the rendering plants in the City of Winnipeg and I've completely investigated, even to the point where I started working in a rendering plant when I was in high school. lt was my first contact with a rendering plant. I've been inside a rendering plant and worl<ed inside a rendering plant and I don't imagine there's anybody else here who has worked inside a rendering plant. They've been by it and enjoyed the aromas that come from those plants, but I have been inside and I know a little bit about it.

Can the Honourable Minister advise whether the level of odours that seems to have been diminishing in our area has anything to do with the Province of Manitoba in controlling these odours that are coming from these particular areas? Can the Honourable Minister or his department take credit for what appears to be a lessening of these odours coming from the rendering plants? HON. G. LECUYER: I thank the Member for Niakwa. The Member for Niakwa refers to a lifetime research of the ind ustry, going back to his high school days, actually I worked in the industry as well in those days.

The odour, the member is correct, living in the area, representing the constituency where a lot of that occurs. The member mentions it because he's just adjacent to it and therefore knows of what he speaks, just as much as I do. You are quite correct in saying th at there are regulations. The industry, by and large, abides by these regulations and I can only assume that the system in place and the bugs in the system have been ironed out, to a point where there's less of a frequency of ·malfunctioning occurring.

When the problems have occurred in the past, it's not because there were not regulations or not an indication that they were purposely disregarding the regulations, but there are instances where there is malfunction, stoppage in the system or start-ups in the system In these situations, or temperature inversions or creat ions where the odours have been particularly bad, and I'm sure the member will find that this from time-to-time will re-occur.

But it seems that in recent time, for a combination of factors. perhaps because of closer monitoring as well as, it seems, the system is functioning just more efficiently. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I am aware that there's about 100 jobs that are involved with the rendering industry in the City of Winnipeg, which isn't a .small item, and I am told through investigation that the odours have been decreased because what has been happening is that the effluent that is going into the sewer has been cooled down to the degree where the smell isn't ·quite as harsh and being transmitted because it's trans mitted a heck of a lot easier with heat. When it's cooled down the smell isn't trans mitted quite as much.

I think that the people in the industry are becoming quite conscious of what's happening and are getting to be very good corporate citizens and are trying to contribute to the good part of our environment. The only other item that I was going to ask at this point was what is happening - well two questions - what is happening to the fine s that are imposed on these compan ies when the effluent is of a higher degree? Where does that money go, into what coffers?

Is that money going to be used for the betterment of the industry or Is it just a fund that is being used by the Provincial Government or the City of Winnipeg? I'm not sure who is imposing that fine, but it is being imposed and I think that rather than imposing a fine, I think that we should be controlling it to the point where the effluent meets the necessary regulations. Can the Honourable Minister bring me up to date on that? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr.

Chairman, for the member's benefit, I would encourage Industry and we encourage industry on the whole to spend their money on putting in place mechanisms anci 3ystems that will better protect the environment, the health of people, and avoid as much as possible, having to pay such fines. But when they have to, the member knows full well that the whole judicial system is not a money-maker but a cost factor, and like all fines, they go into general revenue, when that has to happen. MR. A.

KOVNATS: Can the Honourable Minister bring me up to date on the regulations concerning noises coming from railroad yards, highways that go by his house and mine from the heavy trucks? I know the Honourable Minister stood out on the highway and listened to those noises, because we have discussed it. What are the regulations and are we doing anything to discourage trucks and cars and railroads from making unnecess ary noises? HON. G.

LECUYER: we do have regulations under Workplace Safety and Health for the workpla ce areas, but that is not what the member is refe rring to and I know he is not, because, as he mentions, we have talked about this before. He is referring specifically to noise levels in the area near where I live. In fact, the city has a noise by-law; and other than that, there are no other by-laws.

I am afraid that the problem to which the mem ber refers is one that will have to be solved through a number of other very costly alternatives such as, In the long run, the completion of the Perimeter Highway in nor' teast Winnipeg would help, as some of the truck traffic that goes that way would have an altern ative rtoute to follow. As the member knows. it's one of those alternat ives that I advocate, but one that I know, full well, also has to be taken into consideration along with all of the other priorities of the province and the government. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(a) - the Member for Gla dstone. MRS. C.

OLESON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 1440

Thurecfay, 31 May, 1984 About this time last year, I was getting letters from people in my constituency concerning the Ayerst Plant in Brandon and the Clean Environment Commission's involvement with that, and there were further studies going to be done on the effluent from that plant. I am just wondering if the Minister could bring us up to date on what has transpired concerning that plant. HON. G. LECUYER: The particular industry comes under the City of Brandon by-law. As far as we know, in terms of the citizen complaints, the air emissions are actually minimal emanating from tha t particular operation.

The liquid wastes are discharged into the City of Brandon sewer system. The ammonia itself in the wastes, which has been the primary cause of citizen complaints, has been investigated and the cause rectified by the City of Brandon itself. The City of Brandon has a sewer charge imposed on the Ayerst operation and the spent solvents from the operation are collected and burnt at the City of Brandon waste disposal site with the approval of the city and the environmental management division. MR S. C.

OLES ON: Well, then, has there been monitoring of the Assiniboine River to satisfy the Clean Environment Commission that the problem is taken care of? HON. G. LECUYER: I have a fair bit of information on it here in front of me, but what I want to indicate to the member is that, yes, there has been an extensive amount of monitoring taking place. In fact, the matter is in fact being considered by the Clean Environment Commission at this very point in time. MRS. C.

OLESON: Then I take it that the company is able to operate and is still managing to process the product, and which the Min ister probably kn ows, employs quite a few people in my constituency, and the fact that they have extensive herds of horses involved in this, they're very concerned that the regulations might put them out of business. HON. G. LECUYER: lt is definitely not our desire to put people out of business, nor the Clean Environment Commission neither, but it is the role of the division to monitor and control the emissions and assist the industry to comply with the regulations in place.

Most of the time, most operations are able to do so. In some instances, once the regulations and the level is fully understood and clear, if the adjustments are required, generally they can be put in place. We hope that as a result of the present situation that is being considered now in regard to Ayerst, that is what is going to happen, that this operation will be able to continue.

I cannot speculate as to exactly- I cannot say if any modifications will be required, if the Clean Environment Commission will have recommendations that will assist the industry in bringing about modif ication if it sees that as necessary. MRS. C. OLESON: With regard to Simplot in Brandon, I read in Hansard of the'83-84 Estimates that there was a hearing to be held in October of'83 with regard to the Simplot Chemical Co., and I am wondering what the results of that hearing were. What were the results of that hearing? HON. G.

LECUYER: In regard to the Simplot operation, there are two areas; one has to do with the liquid effluents and the other is the air emission. The one the member is referring to has to do with the air emission. The Clean Environment Commission has provided a report and recommendations to the Minister and the concerned parties with regard to the order under which the Simpl ot operates in terms of air emission.

The Minister has decided to approv e the recommendations of the Clean Environ ment Commission which, in essence, do provide for a slight increase in flexibility to the Simplot operations in terms of air emissions which prior to now requi red them to limit their emissions to two parts per million and on the basis of the Clean Environment Commission - I hope the former Minister of Environment leaves the place before - I'm trying to stretch so that he doesn't hear me - but has recommended that it be raised to three parts per million which has been approved. HON. J. COWAN: About time. Hear, hear, about time. MR.

CHAIRM AN: 3.(a)- pass - the Mem ber for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Is my colleague finished her questions? Mr. Chairman, if my memory serves me correctly, the original standard imposed by the previous Minister was one part per million. HON. G. LECUYER: Pardon me. I missed that. MR. D. ORCHARD: The original limit was one . HON. J. COWAN: Your memory is as bad as your logic. MR. D. ORCHARD: The original limit was one? HON. J. COWAN: Two. MR. D. ORCHARD: Was two parts . HON. J. COWAN: By the Clean Environment Commission. MR. D. ORCHARD: There was no attempt to restrict them to one part per million, Mr. Chairman?

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. CHAIRMAN: There will be some trouble in the recording of the proceedings. The Member for Pembina has the floor. MR. D. ORCHARD: Did the monitoring over the period of time show any expansion beyond the originally set limit, whether it was one or two parts? HON. G. LECUYER: The member's memory is close to being correct, but there's a big difference in this particular case, because it's 100 percent difference. 1441

Thursday, 31 May, 1984 The limit was two parts per million and for the member's benefit, that wasn't set by the Min ister, but it was set by the Clean Environment Commission. MR. D. ORCHARD: Now, I take it, th e Clean Environment Commission is making a recommendation to go to three? HON. G. LECUYER: lt has made that recommendation and a paper is being prepared by the current Min ister for approval by Cabi net to abide by tha t recommendation. MR. D.

ORCHARD: lt ends up with the Min ister, presumably this Minister, is going to approve a three part per million and my error was 100 percent, his increase is 50 percent. Would that be correct? HON. G. LECUYER: That is quite correct. MR. D. ORCHARD: The question I have: did Simplot exceed the two parts per million during the monitoring period? HON. G. LECUYER: it's my understanding that Simplot has exceeded that limit on occasion and that there have been modifications to its operation.

These were referred in last year's Estima tes as being impl emented and it is our understanding that the operation can now function under normal circumstances, under the three parts per million. The Simplot industry - there are exemption times whereby for instance, should there be malfunction or stoppage or start-up due to these malfunctions, then there will be un der those circumstances times when the levels will be higher, but tha t is also provided for under the current recomm endations of the Clean Envir onment Commission.

The limit, I'm advised, will also be reviewed in approximately a year's time from now by the Clean Environment Commission. MR. D. ORCHARD: Is it a fair assumption that the momentary exemptions column in start-up and plant failur e, they were not part of the two part per million Glean Environment order? They were part of it? HON. G. LECUYER: They were, yes, they were. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Chairman, just one question. Can you smell three parts per million of ammonia? HON. G.

LECUYER: The Member from Pembina - I went over the records of last year's Estimates and I know that the previous Minis ter of Environment and the Member from Pembina went at it on that particular issue for a lengthy period of time. HON. J. COWAN: lt wasn't so long. MR. A. KOVNATS: Gerry, if anybody could, you could. A MEMBER: With a nose like his. HON. G. LECUYER: I am advised by the Member from Niakwa that if anybody could distinguish it, I could, and I have to advise the Mem ber from Pem bina appearances can be fooling. it's not the size that determines the quality of the smell; mine works very poorly.

Actually I could say that it totally malfunctions, therefore I probably could withstand 50 parts per million. To come back to the question or the point raised by the Member from Pembina; I'm given to understand those who have a very refined smaller, probably can smell the ammonia when it reaches a level of somewhere around five parts per million or perhaps a little bit less in some cases, but that's about the threshold point - five parts per million. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mi nister of Em ployment Securities. HON. L.

EVANS: I'd like to participate in this debate just for a moment or two because of the questions asked by the Member from Pembina. As the Member for Brandon East in which this facility is located, I can tell you that over the years I've had dozens, if not hundreds, of phone calls of people phoning me at 11 o'clock at night, little old ladies, maybe little old men too, complai ning about the smell from Simplot.

Now, I'm not suggesting for a moment that the quantity of ammonia in the air, the content Is such that it's lethal, I'm not suggesting that, but it is annoying and people with respiratory diseases in particular seem to get very upset about it. I would like to invite members to be in Brandon at times when you have these big green-purple clouds wafting over the communit y, and people do get upset. I've gone out for walks, as I usually do in the evening, and I've had my lungs cleaned out a few times by a very powerful smell of ammonia.

Now, I don't know what the parts per million were, but I can tell you it is a nuisance factor and it could be a danger in some cases. There's been occasions where they've shut off the ventilating system at the Brandon General Hospital because of ammonia seeping into the air vents, etc., of the hospital. So, I would just say this, that the people that live nearby and are affected by gases that come out from time to time, particularly if the wind is blowing from the east or the southeast, are concerned and I get the phone calls.

I'm not arguing that it is a lethal amount, I don't think it is because nobody has died or dropped dead on the street yet, but nevertheless, people do get concerned. The fire hall gets calls, and the MLA gets calls and people want you to do something about it. I'm very glad that the former Minis ter and our government did have the Clean Envir onment Commission go there and give the public an opportunity to be heard and make their concerns known. . ;oN. G.

LECUYER: In replying to the Member from Pembina's comments a while ago, I hadn't noticed that the official watchdog from Brandon East was part of our deliberations. I probably would have been careful, or I would have sent a memo to the Member from Pembina and asked him to ask this question later. I know the Member from Brandon East has a very sensitive smeller and what no one knows is, is he actually acts as the monitoring system over there. 1442

Thurada,; 31 May, 1984 MR. CHAIRMAN: No imputations. HON. G. LECUYER: Getting serious here, I would like to also indicate for the Member for Brandon East, and I think he is aware of this, that the complaints he's reJerring to have been far fewer and far between in recent times than they had in the past. This is due in large measure to some of the improvements put into place by the Simplot and that I think we can say what Simplot has. I've had a number of discussions with them. They have certainly showed a great deal of willingness to co-operate in every respect possible.

I think that everybody in the area, in fact, at the Clean Environment Commission, and the commission makes these comments in its report that the members who appeared at the hearings made the comments that there had been general improvements in recent times. We can only hope that it will continue on that basis and the Simplot operation will be able to function in an ongoing basis in compliance with the regulation. MR. D. ORCHARD: Did I understand the Minister correctly that this new order, 3 parts per million, is up for review at a year's time? HON. G. LECUYER: I believe that is correct. An approximate time.

I'm not sure if I say a year's time, I don't want the Member for Pembina to hold me to a week or a month there, but give or take, yes. MR. D. ORCHARD: Well then, will it go through a hearing process again at that time? HON. G. LECUYER: Yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(a) - the Member for Gla dstone. MRS. C. OLESON: Could the Minister indicate, has he any knowledge of what it cost Simplot to implement any changes they had to implement to comply with the regulations? HON. G. LECUYER: There are two ways of answering that.

If the member is asking how much additional amount it costs to comply, I believe that part of the expansion of its operation, which in itself was a very costly expansion or measure, but the expansion enable d them to increase their production, I don't know by how much. But in performing the expansion, there were improvements to the mechanisms put in place which make for lower emissions, but to be able to tell you how much it actually costs to further limit the emissions, I couldn't give you the exact number.

The officials from Simplot, when I last talked with them, are perfectly conscious of some of the remarks also gleaned from last year's hearings. Whatever amount of ammonia goes out the stack is also revenue lost, and their interest as well as in the interest of all residents of Brandon is that it be limited to the greatest degree possible. MR. CHAIRMAN: 3.(a)- pass; 3.(b)- pass. Resolution 69: Resolved that there be granted to Her Ma jesty a sum not exceeding $31 5,800 for Environment and Workpl ace Safety Health, Clean Envirnment Commission, for the fiscal year ending the 31s t day of March, 1985- pass. 4.(

a) Manitoba Environmental Council, Salaries; 4.(

b) Other Expenditures - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Mr. Chairman, I would ask the Honourable Minister to advise who are the people who provide the advice to the Minister regarding Environmental problems and concerns? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, on The Ma nitoba Environment Council, there are approxima tely 100 people who serve on the council. At some specific times there might be a few less, but it's limited to 100. MR. A. KOVNATS: So, am I led to believe that the salary is $500 a year per person? HON. G. LECUYER: I'm advised that also includes fringe benefits. All kidding aside, Mr.

Chairman, this represents the salaries for permanent staff of the Manitoba Environmental Council which in 1984-85 stands at just over two and a frac tion, and that represents the salaries of 49,900. MRS. C. OLESON: How often does this group meet? HON. G. LECUYER: With that size of a committee, the committee deals with a wide variety of Issues and has quite a few committees which meet. One or another of the committee of the Environmental Council meeting on a weekly basis, but the whole Environmental Council meets twice a year. MRS. C.

OLESON: Well, they have an entirely different function from the Clean Environment Commission, is that correct? They are an advisory group that advise you on matters that should be brought to your attention about a wide range of things to do with the environment, I take it, and you develop a policy from their recommendations? HON. G. LECUYER: That is quite correct. Perhaps I could give you some examples.

During the course of 1983-84, they sub mitted 10 briefs on various issues going from pest control, public education, on methods of pest control, establishment of pesticides control, hunting of timber wolves, legal hunting. They perform such special functions as advice to the Minister on matters regarding aerial spraying for mosquitoes. They took

part in the 1983 consultation which had been established by the past Minister of Environment. They give lectures on various topics in environmental issues. They are actively involved in the environmental week and they also organize the cartoon contests in the sc hools. They are involved in public education programs and will, for instance, man the stalls at the particular exhibitions and a wide variety of other programs. MR. CHAIRMAN: 4.(a)- pass; 4.(b)- pass.

Resolution 70: Resolved that there be granted to Her Ma jesty a sum not exceeding $62,600 for Environment and Workplace Safety and Health, the Manitoba Environmental Council, for the fiscal year ending 31 st day of March, 1985- pass. 5.(a)(1) , Workplace and Worker Services, Workplace Safety and Health: Salaries; 5.(a)(2), Other Expenditures. 1443

Thuraday, 31 May, 1114 Okay we stop at 5.(a)( 1) and 5.(a)(2) - the Member for Gladstone. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In last year's act by this department, there was a Workplace Committee's regulation set up, whereby people with employees of more than 20 were to set up a commit tee in the workplace. Has the Mini ster had any complaints about these commit tees? HON. G.

LECUYER: I gather the member was referring to the Work place Safety and Health Committees which were in existence under the previous act and which are now mandator y, largely based on the number of employees, under the amended act as it came in force on January 1, 1984. There we expect that the number of Workpl ace Safety and Health Committees are going to continue and grow during the year, and that as a result of these committees coming into existence in the workpla ce that the numb er of accidents and ill nesses related to injuri es in the workplace hopefully will decrease.

There will be of course a period of time or a transition when these committees, first of all, come into place and start functioning properly as a Workplace Safety and Health Commit tee. But if the member is saying have there been complaints in terms of resistance to the establishment of such committees? Very few that I'm aware of. We did receive a few of those specifically in regard to the school divisions, for instance. Lately I'v e also received, what I've done in regard to those, I've indicated that the legislation had been enacted and that I expected that the commit tees were already in place.

Since then I've received and told some of these school divisions, for instance, to get in touch with other school divisions who already had committees in place before they were even mandatory, in fact, and were quite pleased with the fact that they had them in place. There have been a number of positive articles that have appeared: one in the MAST Review and to the Manitoba Teacher. Since then - it might be interesting for the member that one of the divisions that had complained sent me the copy of the minut es of the meeting with the teachers recently indicating that they had put in place their comm ittee.

They're quite happy of the development so far and hopefully they will continue to be as commit tee starts to be operative. MRS. C. OLESON: Well, I'm wondering if the Mini ster is aware of one particular problem that surfaces with school divisions, that is, that the regulations apparently say that the meetings have to take �lace within the working hours of the people involved.

With school boards involved with teachers, with custodians, and with bus drivers, it follows that there's no possible way they could meet while all of those people are working because when the teachers are working the bus drivers are not and vice versa, for instance. I'm wondering if the Mini ster allows any leeway in that matter because it is very difficult for a school board to comply. HON. G. LECUYER: Perhaps there is confusion in the fact that all the act says, or the regulation says, is that it has to considered part of their work schedule, but it doesn't say that it has to be during working hours.

In fact, regarding the specifics, how the school division goes about implementing its commit tee, there's a great deal of flexibility open. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)( 1) . HOH. G. LECUYER: I'm sorry. MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Min ister. HON. G. LECUYER: The staff is advising me that there is actual - and I want to correct that - the wording actually says during working hours. But that has been interpreted and will continue to be interpreted as part of the work

schedule of the employees. MRS. C. OLESON: Because that was one difficulty that they were going to comply to the letter of the regulations, then they would, you know, I'm sure you'll understand that would be rather difficult.

One school board in my constitue ncy, I was· reading in the Neepawa Press of Ma rch 1s t, li sts all the inspect ions and various regulatory boards, their bodies that inspect their schools, and found it a little difficult to see why this one was necessary. ;•11 quote where it says: "Our schools are now being inspected by the caretakers, principals, the loss prevention officer from MAST, representativ es from the Fire Commissioner's Office, the local Fire Department, the Department of Health, the Department of Labour, Department of Education, and the Clean Environ ment Act people." So they found it very difficult to figure out why they need yet another body to study all this matter.

So I'm sure that most of them will of course comply, but it does present another expense because they're going to have to pay people for the time they spend at these meetings. lt is another form of inspection in the workpl ace which they really didn't feel was necessary. HON. G. LECUYER: I think the member is quite correct that in the school division system initially there was a negative reaction. I think that to a large extent the portent of the regulation was not fully understood. I think that the ongoing discussions that have taken place with the various school division indicate that this is not so any more.

During the course of the last week, 50 school divi sions were conta cted and a negative response was heard from only two of them, so the school divisions are complying. I think that they don't see it so much as an infring ement or it's seen more as, perhaps even more so, important in the school system to develop the proper workpla ce safety and health habits in the school system because this is where the Norkers of tomor row are being formed.

That inasmuch as - well, I suppose we could branch out to c:-10ther topic here - we hope that these habits, they have to be formed somewhere and it is very important that they be formed at an early age as part of our school system which should teach our young people not only the academics required to enter into either continu ed education or various profession but as well to teach them this is part of the lifestyle that they will carry - not only carry on in the workplace but also during their leisure hours. 1444

Thuract.y, 31 May, 1884 MRS. C. OLESON: Just one question, probably from the Minister's answer. Are there students on these committees? HON. G. LECUYER: There should be, yes, and they're at what we expect will happen and is happening, is that students at the high school level are being appointed as representatives on the committees. There will be teachers, there will be students on the committee. Now we're not saying to the school division you have to have a committee at each school level. There will be in some cases only a committee at the divisional level, on which there will be some students.

We don't expect to see some elementary students on the committees. MRS. C. OLESON: Well, in the case of a school in a division with over 20 staff members, for instance, would they be required to have a committee and would the division level also have to have a committee or could you have one to do the whole division? HON. G. LECUYER: I thought that's that what I had already stated, but to clarify, and I've verified to make sure I was providing the correct information, there is no requirement that there be a committee at every school level. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)(1) - the Member for Gladstone. MR. C.

OLESON: This is on another matter. There was reference in the Estimate debates of last year to regulations tha t a plan be worked out between employers and emp loyees as to what to do in emergencies and this is concerning workers working alone in convenience stores. I'm wondering if that has taken place, was there a follow-up on that, and is this plan to be registered with this department or what is the procedure? HON. G.

LECUYER: The working alone regulations which the member refers to is one that has been in the process of being developed now for 18 months, I am told, which has gone out for consultation I think three times or at least twice, which is now in its third draft form. I understand it's now in the hands of the Workplace, Safety and Health Advisory Council. lt's in the hands of Legislative Counsel for final drafting for the correct wording. I expect that I will be receiving that final dr aft in the very near future for a recommendation to Cabi net and adoption as a regulation under The Workplace, Safety and Health Act.

MRS. C. OLESON: Has the Minister received input from some of the larger convenience store chains and from others as to input into the regulations? HON. G. LECUYER: The draft regulations were se.1t out to 1,5 00 different groups, interested parties, convenience stores, retail chains, who had an opportunity to provide us with their input on this particula r issue. That is one of the reasons, Mr. Chairman, that the regulation has been so long into the drafting. MR. CHAIR MAN: 5.(a)(1) - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Concerning the Workmans Compensation Board . MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr.

Minister. HON. G. LECUYER: For the Member for Nlakwa's benefi(, that's why I thought we would deal with S.(

a) and deal with the Compensation Board under S.(

b) and the Worker Advisor under S.(b). MR. CHAIRMAN: If we pass by S.(a), we go to the Workers Compensation Board. HON. G. LECUYER: That's what we had I thought agreed upon, when we began the . . . MR. A. KOVNATS: Fair enough. We're talking about workplace, safety and health then before we get to Workers Compensation Board. Concerning the new regulations, as far as any of the workers who will not have to work, if there is a danger to their health in the workplace. I started speaking on it a little earlier ·and I am very very concerned as to who's going to regulate it.

Now I know that there's going to be some cases that are ridiculous and there's going to be some that are absolutely worthwhile. Who is going to regulate to protect the workers who are hone st and the management? HON. G. LECUYER: The member is referring to the right to refuse dangerous work without fear of discrimination or loss of pay. The member perhaps doesn't know or has forgotten that this regulation, this measure has been in place or in existence since 1977.

I guess what we have to add, having said that, is that with the amendments to The Workplace, Safety and Health Act in the last legislation, the procedure has been more clearly defined and as a result, specific 8- step procedures have been set out in the act, whereby it's clarified how this right to refuse is to be utilized. For instance, well I don't want to go into the details of the 8-step measure, but that's drafted as part of the act. If the member wishes to have a copy of the act to refer to that or if he wants me I shall go into the details, but as a result of the new amendments to the act, no, Mr.

Chairman, we don't expect that there will be undue or abuse of the system through frivolous recall to that right to refuse. In fact, I could give the details of the number of instances it has been resorted to and it's not very frequently, probably not sufficiently frequently enough. But because of the 8-step procedure in place before any employee can abuse of the system, they would have to definitely think twice. As far as I know there hasn't been any abuse at this point in time and no complaints. MR. A.

KOVNATS: If I could just discuss the new health regulations, not in any great length, but just to kind of touch on it. If the Honourable Minister can advise as to what the impact is going to be on the increase in medical costs and I'm told that the increases are going to be - and the word that I was advised - is astronomical and I'm kind of going slowly because I'm just not quite aware. I want to find out from the Minister 1445

Thursday, 31 May, 1984 as to what these increase in costs are going to be, and do we have the staff to look after the new health regulations and hygienists and occupational medical doctors, and who is the chief occupational medical officer? HON. G. LECUYER: I'm not sure that I fully understood the member's comments.

If he is referring to the cost of the amendments to The Work place Safety and Health Act, the commit tees that are in place, that, I expect, is in the end not going to be a cost but a saving factor in terms of the injuries that are going to be prevented and the growing costs and compensation benefits are going to be reduced.

If the member is referring to occupational health, I would like to mention to the member that although we are still in search of a full-time chief occupational health officer, we, in the meantime, do have a person who will be acting in that capacity in the Department of Health in the person of Dr. Peter Warner who will have the responsibility of chief occupational health officer for the departm'3nt or the division of Work place Safety and Health. MR. CHAIRMAN: 5.(a )(1) - the Member for Nia kwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: How many hygienists are on staff right now? HON. G. LECUYER: Ten, the same number as last year. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 5.(a)( 1) -p ass; 5.(a)(2)-pa ss. 5.(b)( 1) Worker Advisor Office: Salaries; 5.(b)

(2) Other Expenditures - the Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: I started asking about Workers Compensation earlier and I was told that we would be getting to it under 5.(b). Can the Honourable Min ister advise whether a review of The Compensation Act will be taking place, has taken place, when it will be announced, who will be doing the review and what the cost of the review will be? HON. G. LECUYER: The member is way ahead of me in that particular area in terms that I cannot provide him with detailed answers to all of these questions.

All I can say is that we are at the point now where I am considering various alternat ives in terms of how to proceed. We are at the point where I am contemplating meeting representati ves of the employers' groups and the workers' groups in order to receive their suggestions in terms of how to proceed in actual fact to start the review process of the Act.

So, at this point in time, all I can say to the member is that I am looking at a group of three people who are not yet selected to do the actual review, to begin the act ual review, but none of this has act ually proceeded to the point of implementation at this time, so there are a variety of options and alternatives still being considered. MR. A. KOVNATS: Are these three people part of the Workers Compensation Board at this p'oint, or are we going to be bringing in additional help? HON. G.

LECUYER: As I said before, I haven't yet made any firm decisions on that and I want to discuss this issue with representatives of the employer groups and the worker groups. But it would be my belief that we should consider appointing people who are not part of the system at the present to conduct this particular review. MR. A. KOVNATS: Concerning the cost of operation of the Workers Compensation Board, I have a figure, but it's not up to me to supply the figure, it's up to the Honourable Min ister, what is the cost of operating the Workers Compensation Board for last year? HON. G.

LECUYER: The member will find that in the Financial Report. Mr. Chairman, is the member referring to the costs of administration or to the total cost? MR. A. KOVNATS: Total cost. HON. G. LECUYER: That's what I thought. The· member will find that on Page 15 of his Financial Report. MR. A. KOVNATS: I don't have the report. HON. G. LECUYER: The total cost was $6 1 million. That's including the compensat ion costs, medical aid costs, rehabilitation costs, amortization of the pension increases in terms of both principal and interest , the adminis tration expenses, the worker advisor operation, all of it. MR. A.

KOVNATS: I only have a couple more questions concerning the payout. What was the difference between the payout over the income? Did we operate the Workers Compensation Board on an equal basis, or was there a net loss or a net gain over the year? HON. G. LECUYER: If the member is looking for the net effect, including the surplus of the reserves, then there is no net deficit, but if the member is looking in terms of the income, as compared to the overall costs, then there is a $19 million deficit. MR. A. KOVNATS: A $19 million deficit, fair enough.

I was just wondering where the percentage increase to the people who pay for the Workers Compensation came from and now I'm aware that there was a net loss of - how much was it? - $19 million? HON. G. LECUYER: In terms of the actual total cost of rayout as compared to the revenue income from asf .ssment fees, a difference of $19 million in 19 83. r.lR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, could the Min ister advise as to the cost of remodelling and refurbishing the board's building in Eaton's? HON. G.

LECUYER: The building impr ovements, including general renovations, electrical alterat ions; approxima tely $237,0 00, which will be amortized over 1446

Thuraday, 31 May, 1884 20 years at a cost of approxima tely $1 2,000 per year. In terms of the new office furnishings; that's made up of approxima tely $300,000 which represents in actual fact approxima tely one cent per $10 0 of assessment of payroll. This, I have to also further add to the member, is also in relation with the bringing on stream of the computer program because of which the present layout and the furnishings of the board were not compatible.

Members should know that the existing furnishings were purchased prior to 1959 and in most cases they utilize more space than necessary - especially on the basis of the fact that the space is pretty crammed at the Compensation Board. We could not accommodate the installation of the computer terminals without these changes. MR. G. MERCIER: Is the Min ister advising th e comm ittee that th e total cost of renovations, remodelling and refurnishing was $237,0 00 plus $300,000.00? HON. G. LECUYER: That's correct. MR. G. MERCIER: Did that include a lounge and carpet ing? HON. G.

LECUYER: I didn't hear the first part of the question. MR. G. MERCIER: Did that include a lounge and carpeting? HON. G. LECUYER: There is no provision in there for a lounge. There is provision for a libr ary and a meeting room. The carpeting referred to is something that was done last year in four offices at the cost of something like $1 9,000.00. Also, the figure given a moment ago and the total renovation that I mentioned also contains, in the area being renovated, some carpet ing in that area. MR. G. MERCIER: Did that work take place in March of this year? HON. G. LECUYER: That work is taking place now. MR. G.

MERCIER: Has the board hired a social director for staff? HON. G. LECUYER: No. MR. G. MERCIER: Can the Min ister advise as to the duties of one Wendy Mi ller? HON. G. LECUYER: She is the information officer for the board. MR. G. MERCIER: Is one of her main functions to arrange socials and entertainment functions amongst staff? HON. G. LECUYER: Not at all. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, does the board pay bonuses to employees? HON. G. LECUYER: Mr. Chairman, at Christmas time the board has been paying a bonus of $25 to employees since 19 49. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, does the board provide days off with pay to staff for recognition of certain achievements? HON. G. LECUYER: it hasn't been heard of. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, in the past few months the board has completed what has been termed its political house cleaning of all senior officers that were on staff of the board when this

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-3-33b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 3rd hansardpdf 33b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	aac61ec1d1ba7533025e3b95846d52e2cc699cb5

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