Manitoba Hansard — 17 April 1984 (Sitting 4A, 32nd Legislature, 3rd Session)

32-3-4a

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. XXXI No. 4A - 2:00 p.m., TUESDAY, 17 APRIL, 1984. Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Manitoba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Second Legialature Members, Constit�encies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANSTETT, Hon. Andy ASHTON, Sieve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, Hon. John M. CARROLL, O.C., Henry N. CORRIN, O.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. (Doug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon.

Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J. Frank KOSTYRA, Hon. Eugene KOV NATS, 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, O.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Myrna A. PLOHMAN, Hon. John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Vie 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 Springfield Thompson La Verendrye Minnedosa Rhineland Gimli Brandon West Ell ice Churchill St. Boniface Riel Elmwood Kildonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concord la Swan River Vir den Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Portage la Prairie Sturgeon 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 Burrows Rossmere lnkster Fort Garry Osborne River Heights Flin Flon lnterlake Lac du Bonnet St.

Vital Party NDP NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP INO ND P 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 NDP PC NDP NDP NDP NDP

LEGISLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 17 April, 1984. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Petitions .. . Reading and Receiving Petitions ... Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to inform the Legislature that the Government of Manitoba has reached an agreement on an important export power sale to Northern States Power Company of Minneapolis, Min nesota.

This announcement is also being made by Northern States Power in Minneapolis today. Under the terms of a recently signed Memorandum of Understanding, Mr. Speaker, Northern States Power will be supplied with 500 megawatts or 500,000 kilowatts a year of firm power for 12 years. Beginning May 1,1993 and running to April 30, 2005, the agreement will generate an estimated $3.2 billion over the 12-year period, or an annual average of $270 million. Mr.

Speaker, a sale of this magnitude and at such good terms will be of enormous benefit to Manitobans. lt will also be a benefit to NSP in that it will allow them to defer a 500 megawatt fossil fuel plant. The Memorandum of Understanding with Northern States Power was negotiated by the Manitoba Energy Authority, which is the Provincial Agency charged with the statutory responsibility for negotiating all electrical energy exports from the Province of Manitoba. The Board of Directors of the Manitoba Energy Authority is made up of representatives from the Provincial Government and Manitoba Hydro.

I would like to publicly acknowledge the work of the officials of the Manitoba Energy Authority. In particular, I would like to thank and pay special tribute to my Deputy Min ister, Mr. Marc Eliesen, the Chairman of the Manitoba Energy Authority, for his leadership and work which has led to the signing of this Memorandum. Mr. Speaker, following a formal signing of the contract in early June in Winnipeg, we will apply to the National Energy Board for an export permit.

At that time comprehensive information will be made available regarding this sale. lt is important to note, that the NSP sale will affect the start-up date for the construction of the Limestone Generating Station. I have asked Manitoba Hydro to accelerate its current studies aimed at determining the most economic time to begin construction. I expect those studies to be completed by the end of this summer and a decision on Limestone construction to be taken by the fall of this year.

In the meantime, the Government of Manitoba will be meeting with construction industry 48 and labo ur representatives, potential Ma nitoba Limestone suppliers - particularly medium and small size companies - and northern communities and associations, in order to ensure that the orderly development of Manitoba's energy resources takes place with the maximum spinoff possible for Manitoba and Manitobans.

Building the Limestone dam would mean a cumulative expenditure of approximately $3 billion over the period required to complete the project. lt would generate more than 17,000 person years of employment, 6,000 person years of employment would be directly related to the dam construction and an additional 11,000 person years would be indirectly related. Our province is fortunate, Mr. Speaker, in having abundant hydro-electric resources owned by the people for the people of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has had a great past, but this government has confidence for an even greater future for us.

Although this represents Manitoba's first major long term firm power sale, the Government of Manitoba is hopeful that in the coming months this valuable renewable resource can be used to further other economic opportunities and to stimulate additional investment and employment in Man itoba. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, in responding to the Minister's statements and the enthusiasm with which members of the New Democratic Party applaud these statements, I am, of course, reminded of the many occasions where they charged another government with going in the wrong direction in exporting power sales; involved, of course, in the export of power sales is the providing of jobs in another jurisdiction, rather than In Manitoba or in Canada. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me hurriedly indicate though the welc oming of this kind of anno uncement for Manitoba Hydro and the people of Manitoba.

I think the people of Manitoba will be anxious to know what this means to them individually. For instance, could it perhaps bring back the hydro freeze that was in existence from 1979 to the time this government came back in? Or will it, in fact, mean that perhaps Manitobans can expect hydro rates to drop from a result of the revenues that this sale will generate, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, we applaud any action that of course will bring forward orderly development of the next phase of construction on the Nelson River. lt's a promise that we, as Manitobans, have yet to see fulfil led.

I remind the Honourable Min ister that even with this sale we, of course, still have an additional 1,000 megawatts of surplus power on the Nelson River and we will be anxiously awaiting any future announcement as to the acceleration of the start up of Limestone. Mr. Speaker, I can only hope that the government will address itself in the same forceful manner in terms

Tuesday, 17 April; 1984 of providing utilization of our rich hydro resources here in this Province of Manitoba; and second best to our sister provinces in developing a Canadian grid and providing Canadians with jobs first, rather than as what has always been known and always been accepted, even though we have no difficulty in accepting the sale, this export of power across the border, but along with the export of power across the border also goes the generation of many tho usands of jobs to those jurisdictions south of our border. Well, Mr.

Speaker, we have no difficu lty in acknowledging and applauding the Minister's successful conclusion of this agreement to suggest to him, of course, that these kinds of negotiations have been ongoing for a number of years.

These kinds of negotiations have been particularly, and were particularly pursued by a former colleague of mine, the then Honourable Don Craik when he was charged with the responsibility of Hydro, is common knowledge, Sir, and the Hansards of this Legislature are filled with the discussions and the efforts that were being made at that time to forge the kind of south north link of the use of power which makes a lot of eminent sense: They are the heavier users in the summertime, we are the heavier users in the wintertime.

Those kinds of discus sion have taken place on numerous occasions in the past and I applaud the Minister's successful conclusion in this instance. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mi nister of Government Services. HON. A. ADAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table the Annual Report for the Department of Government Services for the year 1982-83. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills ... ORAL QUESTIONS Negotiations with Alcoa Company MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines following upon his optimistic announc ement earlier in the Session today. I would like to follow through on a second portion of the Throne Speech that refers to his department and, Sir, I would like to ask him, h view of the reference to the attraction of energy-intensive industry to Manitoba, whether or not negotiations are currently un der way between his department or Manitoba Hydro and the Alcoa Company, with respect to the establishment of an aluminum smelter here in Manitoba. · MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W.

PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I indicated last year in the House -I'm not sure whether the people on the 49 other side believe me that we were und ertaking negotiations with a number of aluminum companies - I did not give the names of any of them for reasons of competitive confidentiality because what one wants to do, Mr. Speaker, is ensure that one canvasses all of the options and gets as many eggs in as many baskets as oossible. We thought that was the prudent approach to take, Mr. Speaker.

We found that previous administrations had put all of their eggs in one basket, and then the basket may be dropped, so we thought it was prudent to canvass a number of options; so we are having discussions with a number of aluminum companies and Alcoa is one of those companies. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that with the coming of Easter we are all appreciative of the reference to the eggs in the baskets, but I would like to ask the Minister of Energy and Mines which officials of Alcoa has the Government of Manitoba, or Manitoba Hydro been in discussion with? HON. W. PARA SIUK: Mr.

Speak er, we have had discussions, at the most senior levels, with Alcoa. Indeed, I am surprised that the Leader of the Opposition seems so concerned about this issue. A few months ago he was qu oted in the paper saying he was cautioning people, that talks between the Manitoba Government and the giant Aluminum Company of America are very very preliminary, and he said, "There is nothing to get excited about at this point." Mr. Speaker, he went on to say that without the NDP reversing its policy and selling the company a portion of a power plant, they will not be very successfu l. That is the Conservative position.

Unless we give away the power dam, there will be no development. We on this side of the House, the New Democratic Party Government under Howard Pawley, believes that fair development can take place on the basis of power contracts. That is the basis on which we have pursued discussions with aluminum companies, Mr. Speaker. We hope that they will be successful. We are confident that this is the rational basis for development in Manitoba.

That will provide the greatest short-term benefit and the greatest long-term development and it shows a very clear contrast in approaches between the Pawley Government and the other government, which would give the resources away possibly to induce development, and ours which wants to take both into account, the short-term and the long-term, so that all Manitoba benefits. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to find out that the Minister can indeed read my quotes from a few months ago.

I have to indicate by way of prefacing my remarks, Sir, that w� on this side can understand very fully the difference between giving away and selling. Obviously the Minister and his colleagues do not und erstand that difference, but that's okay; we appreciate that. What I'm saying is, in view of what he has said, is there anything for us to get excited about with respect to the discussions with Alcoa today? HON. W. PARASIUK: I am hopeful, Mr. Speaker, that these discussions indeed will lead to a development in the future. We are having discussions with other

TUesday, 17 April, 1984 companies as well and if at some stage it is appropriate to make announcements in this Legislature, I make the commitment that I will make those announcements in this Legislature so that we can all hear them. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could indicate who is representing Manitoba in these discussions and negotiations. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Energy Authority, the same group that was so successful in negotiating the power sale with the Northern States Power Company. That group is operating under my jurisdiction and, Mr.

Speaker, I hate to say leadership, but I think all told that's correct, they are operating under my leadership. Mr. Speaker, I have confidence in their ability to negotiate something that is far better than the types of dreams that we've heard about in the past and we will bring forward solid substantive achievements. There may be instances where these will entail letters of understanding and Memorandums of Understanding and, of course, we will let people know about that at the appropriate time, Mr. Speaker.

But let it be clear, the people of Manitoba are well represented by people who have the long-term interests of Manitoba at heart, who have worked far and beyond the call of duty to ensure that we have a better Manitoba, and we'll have a better Manitoba. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister could indicate when was the date of the last meeting between officials of Alcoa and representatives of Manitoba. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I think there are some matters of confidentiality that I cannot divulge at this particular stage. Mr. Speaker, we have to undertake negotiations.

I would hope that the opposition would be constructive and would not want to try and sabotage any of these discussions, Mr. Speak er. I noticed a number of green faces on the other side when I read my discussions. I can say that we have had very recent dis cussions, Mr. Speaker , with representatives from a number of aluminum companies; and at the appropriate time when we don't have constraints of commercial confidentiality, I will in fact let the House know. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Good. Good. MR. G.

FILMON: In view of the fact that when the Minister and his colleagues were in opposition, they insisted that they be told about the discussions that were going on between our government and Alcan and our government and IMC, and they asked for position papers and various different things to be tabled. I don't think it's unreasonable that we should just simply be able to ask, when was the last date at which they met with Alcoa officials. I don't think that's too much to ask and my question is, when was the date of the last meeting between members representing Manitoba and Alcoa? HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, I said there were discussions very recently - there were some last week 50 - but there were discussions with other aluminum companies as well over the course of the last few weeks and that should be made clear to the opposition. There are a number of discussions going places. lt's a matter of trying to ensure that all of them are brought along to the fullest extent possible so that we in fact can have a good choice in Manitoba; that we may in fact not only pursue one development but possibly two developments or hopefully even three developments, Mr. Speaker.

That, we believe, is a wise and prudent approach. So when it comes to disclosure, I have indicated in the statement that I read in this House, that when a contract is signed and a referral is made to the National Energy Board, we have said that we would make available to the public that which can be made available. We on this side, Mr. Speaker, will ensure that the House is kept informed. We hope that we can keep them informed of ever ything. There may be some instances of commercial confidentiality, which I hope the other side, the Conservative Party, would understand.

I would hope that they would come together and try and build with us constructively a better Manitoba, Mr. Speaker. We believe that we on this side of the House can provide the leadership to achieve our potential and we hope that they will come along with us and act constructively to ensure that that potential is indeed achieved. MR. G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, let me assure the Minister that we only seek this information in a co operative spirit that indeed, Mr.

Speaker, we have been shown in recent tim es about some of the secret decisions that are made behind closed doors by this government, the passing of a $1.5 billion Special Warrant, certain agreements that were entered into last year and the difficulties that this government gets into with secret agreements. So, Mr. Speaker, all I'm asking of the Minister is, when are we likely to hear any information about any agreements between the Government of Manitoba and Alcoa with respect to an aluminum smelter? HON. W. PARASIUK: I would hope that I would be able to present information soon.

I have heard - I think that's a good term for the Legislature - I have, in fact, heard the Member for Lakeside give that type of answer many times but I can even go further than that, Mr. Speaker. We've said that we hoped that in the course of the next few weeks, months, as the months unfold, Mr. Speaker , we hope tha t we can have other announcements. We, in fact, have developed this program to build a better future, Mr. Speaker, and we hope that we certainly will keep them informed. There is no secrecy involved. The $1.5 billion Special Warrant was made public immediately with the press release.

That was done by 0/C. I don't think that is secrecy, Mr. Speaker; that surely isn't secrecy and to have it im puted somehow that by releasing an 0/C immediately, by having a press conference, that that is secrecy, Mr. Speaker is indeed not constructive but somewhat mischievous.

Tue�y. 17 April, 1984 Tax relief for homeowners MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Memb er for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I have a question for the First Ministe r . In view of the Fi rst Minister's campaign promise in 1981, to ea se the property tax burde n and, in view of the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that usin g, as an exam ple, an average home in the City of Winnipeg School Division assessed at $7,000; in view of the fact tha t over four years of Conservat ive Government the net property tax has increased some $78, whilst in the first three years under an NDP government the total taxes have in cre ased by some $298, four times the total increase over a four-year period of Conservative Government, can homeowners exp ect some relief in the forthcoming Budget from this government? MR. SPEAKER: The Honoura ble Fi rst Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: fv1r. Sp eak er, the Honourable Member for St.

Norbert is, I'm sure, quite conscious that matters pertai ning to the Budget are announced Budget evening in the appro priate due manner, that is custo mary to this Ch ambe r and to governm e nts everywhere. MR. G. MERCIER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, in view of the clear el ec tion promise by the First Minister in the fall of 1981 and, in view of the complete failur e of this government to live up to that promis e, would the First Minister not agree to at least reduce the number of political advisors, communications people, and the excessive costs of advertising in order to provide some small degree of relief to the homeowner in the city and in the Province of Ma nitoba? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Spea ke r, I will doubl e-check my calculations, but it my recollection that during the first year that this government served in office the amount of grants to local governments, school and munici pal, I believ e exceeded the amount of gra nts provided during the first three years of the previous administration - still ob viously not enough. There is responsi bility also at the local leve l for en suring that in creases be kept to a mi nimum. I would like to at this point, Mr. Speaker, commend local governments in the Province of Ma nitoba.

I have received some in formation in the last few days that en couraged me to be lieve that local governments are acting very responsibly , in fact, there have been some in stances where there have been mill rate decreases on the part of local governments which I find very very en couraging. I think the Honourble Member for St. Norbert should feel good this afte rnoon that there's bee n some leade rship provided by local governme nt, school division level and by the. municipal level to contain costs that's bein g demonstrated at the local level of governme nt. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker , using the ex ample that I used in the Winnipeg School Division, in view of the fact that in three years under the NDP the total increase is nearly four times the total increa se over a four-year 51 period under the previous Conservative Government, is the First Mini ster blaming muni cipalities for those tax Inc reases or does the Provincial Government take responsibility for those tax inc reases? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, unl ik e the honourable memb er we :�re not trying to find scapegoats in local government.

We recognize that all Manitobans through various levels of governme nt must provide vital and impo rtant services, and those im portant services are provided through the school divisions, the municipalities of the province, through the City of Winnipeg. At the same time there.'s a responsibil ity on governments to contain costs during difficult times.

And what I indi cated to the honourabl e member - and he must not have heard - rather than blaming local government I had, indeed, commanded much of the local government In the Province of Manitoba this time for containing costs and, in some Instances that I know, Mr. Speaker, have caused a net reduction in mill rate. I woul d like to commend that level of local government, and the Minister of Municipal Affairs, I' m sure, could provide other exam ple s that in deed where that is occurring, that there is leade rship being d('II"" Onstrated by local government.

I think we should feel pleased and not be looking around, as the Honou rable Member for St. Norbert appears to be desirous of doing this afternoon, of blaming someone or el se. Effect of reduction in grain prices MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Memb er for The Pas. MR. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Spea ker, I would lik e to ask a question of the Mini ster of Agric ulture. In view of the recently announced reduction In the initial grain prices, can the Ministe r tell this Legisla ture and the people of Manitoba what effect the reduction in the Initial grain prices may have on the grain farmers of Manitoba? MR.

SPEA KE R: The Ho nou rable Min is te r of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speak e r , I thank the honourable member for that question. We are very concerned, ob viously , with the reduction in the initial prices to be paid on grains. lt will, we believe, place greater strain on an already depressed farm economy across Western Canada. If anything there Is now greate r responsibility on the Government of Canada to make amendments to The Western Grain Stab i lization Act, to make an im media te payme nt to sensitize that legi slation and to make sure that cash flows now before seeding time to Western Canada, Mr.

Spea ker. MR. H. HARAPIAK: What steps have you taken as Mi nister to assist the Manito ba grain farmers in view of this annou ncement? HON. B. URUSKI : Mr. Sp ea ke r , we ha ve made representations as far back as 1983 recognizing the serious cash situation of Manito ba farmers and of farmers in Western Canada. As late as the last week in March we did send a telex to the Minister of

TUesday, 17 April, 1984 Agriculture, Mr. Speaker, recommending five points and I think the honourable members opposite should be made aware of the five points that we have stressed to the Federal Minister of Agriculture dealing with The Western Grain Stabilization Fund.

(1) To reduce the averaging period to three years from the current five year period. This will remove the impact of very low years from the average at an earlier date.

(2) Basing payouts on a crop year in order to reduce the time tag between the cash flow period and the receipt of payments by farmers.

(3) Include an adjustment factor for incr eased sales volume so that the effect of increased volumes does not fully offset price declines.

(4) Compute the net cash flows on a provincial basis to make the program more sensitive to more local farmer requirements.

(5) In view of the cash shortage of Western Canadian farmers to permit farmers meeting hardship criteria to discontinue paying contributions to the fund while mainta ining participation by establishing a contingent liability to the fund for the unpaid contributions so that they will be able to stay in the fund and receive the cash required to complete their spring seeding. Assessment Review MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would like to also address a question to the Honourable Min ister of Agriculture, in the light of his recent response.

Could the Minister give this House any indication of the number of Manitoba farmers in each of the last two years who have had their farm dwellings taxed because of their declining net farm income? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I can't answer that question because that does not fall under my purview. MR. H.

GRAHAM: I would like to ask the Honourable Minister of Agriculture if he has raised this question with the Honourable Minister of Mu nicipal Affairs who has a very serious problem with his department who are going around this province almost indiscriminately asking farmers for privileged information to determine whether or not their farm dwellings should be taxed? MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. If members have a

preamble to a question they should recall that

preamble by definition comes before the question and not after the question. The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr . Sp eaker , first of all, the honourable member should be aware that the Minister of Mun icipal Affairs and myself are working very closely, along with other colleagues, to deal with the whole question of assessment. Maybe the honourable member doesn't realize that.

As well, he should be aware and I am sure that most people are aware, that the law he is speaking about has been on the books of the Province of Manitoba long before any one of us here in this Chamber were mem bers, Mr. Speaker, and that it's a law in longstanding. 52 Mr. Speaker, it was a commission that was established by his administration, by their administration, that recommended, rather than piecemeal changes to the assessment legislation there should be a broad review of the exemptions and procedures and we, Mr.

Speaker, and the Minister of Municipal Affairs of this government are working very hard to try and deal with that question in the long term, rather than by dealing it piecemeal, Sir. MR. H.

GRAHAM: A fina l supplementary to the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, because I know he had an interest in municipal affairs in the past, and because he also has a good knowledge of agriculture and probably a list of all the farmers of Manitoba, will he inform the farmers of Manitoba of the strenuous efforts that this government is taking to relieve the tax burden on farmers who are hard pressed because of declining farm incomes? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I believe the honourable member is asking to do a mailing to all the farmers. Mr.

Speaker, I think we should take him up and consider his request and mail a publication to all the farmers of Manitoba recognizing that this government has put more into agriculture than any government in the history of this province. Admittedly, Sir, it will never be enough and we recognize how difficult it Is in the farm community with depressed incomes and the like, but we certainly want to take his encouragement under advisement and I thank him for that. Self-government for Camperville MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Swan River. MR. D. GOURLAY: I direct a question to the First Min ister.

In tod ay's Free Press it ind icates the proclamation of self-government for the community of Camperville and, in view of the province's desire to entrench self-government for In dian and Me tis communities in our Constitution at the recent First Ministers' Conference held in Ottawa, I believe the first part of March, can the Premier advise If the Camperville situation was developed in consultation with that community? MR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I think we should just remind the Honourable Member for Swan River that at the First Ministers' Conference, the question of self government was indeed raised and dealt with rather extensi vely. There were, in fact, a numb er of governments supportive, other governments not yet prepared to be supportive. Insofar as the issue of Camperville and the announcement yesterday, I am not aware of any consultation. MR. D.

GOURLAY: Well, in view of the announcement and the implications it has for some 50 or more other Metis communities in the province, is the First Minister in agreement with what the mayor of that community is doing?

lU ... y, 17 April, 1884 MR. SPEAKER: Questioners should not ask for the opinions of the Treasury Bench, only for information which might be available from there. Perhaps the honourabl e member would wish to rephra se his question. MR. D. GOURLAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wonder then if I could ask the First Minister whether this government supports the self-government introduction of the Camperville community. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, this government, along with other governments, particularly the Government of New Brunswick and the Government of Ontario, adopted the position of the evolution of local government towards self-government, but not in unilateral fashions or unilateral manners or ways, but in a manner that would be consistent by way of development through the constitutional process of Canada. MR. D. GOURLAY: I direct a further question then to the Minister of Northern Affairs.

In view of the fact that Camperville has proclaimed themselves self government in the Province of Ma nitoba, what implications does the Minister see for his department with respect to the Camperville community? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I should inform the honourable member that the issue of self government and the question of Metis self-government has been raised to this government previously and I am sure is something that has been talked about in a number of other jurisdictions across Canada.

In fact, in August I believe of last year, the Mayor and Council of Camperville presented a paper to the Provincial Government outlining some directions that they would like to see taken in terms of gaining some self-control, and I think the Premier has amply put it, that self-government and self-control is something that all Northern Affairs communities desire and a greater degree of control over their local administration and the resource areas.

The fact is that I spoke with the Mayor of Camperville, the Mayor of the Community Council there, this morning and asked whether this new conceptual framework that they're talking about in Camperville would in any way impair the operations of the Community Council with respect to the Department of Northern Affairs and the jurisdiction of the Department of Northern Affairs vis a-vis The Northern Affairs Act on that community, and the answer is, no. I think it is to be left for the people of Camperville to further explain and define what this Metis self government is to be about.

I think. the department has worked with a number of communities to develop their local control mechanisms and we're convinced at this point that our Northern Affairs communities will continue to work toward incorporation. There are a number of communities that are nearly at that point and we certainly encourage them to develop the expertise in their local communities, to handle their own affairs, to 53 be more consistent with other LGDs and municipalities in the powers and jurisdictions that they have locally.

That's what they're asking for from our perspective and that's something that we're prepared to work toward. This is another issue. Status of power sales to provinces MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. D. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Energy and Mines and the Minister responsible for the very successful negotiations that are leading up toward a $3.2 billion power sale. I note a slight sense of pessimism in the members opposite. MR. SPEAKER: Que stion? MR. D. SCOTT: Mr.

Speaker, the opposition lead critic this afternoon questioned that we had a power sale to the Northern United States Power Corporation instead of our sister provinces. Would the Minister of Energy please inform the Hous e as to the status of the negotiations with our sister provinces toward future potential power sales to those provinces? HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, I welcome the question in view of some of the somewhat convoluted speech made yesterday by the Leader of the Conservative Party where he supposedly tabled documents that show that somehow the grid was lost but, in fact, the letters that he tabled were In response to a request that I had made to see whether, in fact, we couldn't be good Canadians; to see whether we couldn't, in fact, promote the development of power sales to Saskatchewan and Alberta.

I will be speaking on the Throne Speech Debate tomorrow and I will be able to tabl e other documentation. - (Interjection) - I see that the Member for Sturgeon Creek is heckling. I wore this burgundy tie deliberately to see whether in fact the colour of his face would match it. I can see that his happiness is such that the tie is getting close to his colour. Mr. Speaker, I will be able to table documentation tomorrow that will show that the demand projections for energy in Alberta and Saskatchewan are down 30 percent and 40 percent of what they envisaged in 1981 or'82.

That is what's going on in Alb erta and Saskatchewan, but I'll be pleased to talk about it tomorrow in the Throne Speech. I'll be pleased in fact to find out what the specific position of the Conservative Party is; because today the Member for Lakeside said that we shouldn't be selling to the Americans, and then he turned around at the end of his stateme.�t and said that it was wonderful because, Mr. Speaker, they had started it when, in fact, this particular sale has nothing to do with any initiatives they ever undertook. Effect of reduction in grain prices MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J.

DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I have a further question to the Minister of Agriculture and I

TUea day, 17 April, 1984 would have thought the Member for The Pas, when he was asking the questions, would have shown a little more interest in the subject matter on which he was questioning the Minister. I would ask the Minister of Agriculture if he has in fact figured or calculated the amount of dollars that the lowering of the initial grain prices will cost the farmers of Manitoba? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, of course no one knows what the crop will be because the initial prices are for next year's crop, but there are estimates that the reduction in income will be over $200 million. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speaker, that is a substantial amount of money and I'm sure that we, as an opposition, would request to the Minister, and I'll ask him, if he will take direct action to put forward some provincial pressure on the Federal Minister of Agriculture who is busy campaigning, and the Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board, not to allow this to happen, in fact, put forward a proposition to them that the wheat prices should not be allowed to drop and that we cannot afford, as a farm community, that kind of a reduced income in this province.

I would request that the Minister do that and do it immediately following this sitting of the House, and not go through his tirade of how he has requested the Federal Government to make a payout of the Western Grain Stabilization, as in fact it took us to prod him to do that even. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member well knows that the grain prices are a reflection of the world market in grains, a market that he and his party support in terms of having the open market and they reflect the grain prices, Sir.

That is to say that the depressed pr ices are of serious concern to this government and we have attempted to say in the fall of 1983 and the summer of 1983 and the winter of 1984. lt may take, again if it will help to maybe shanghai the Minister of Agriculture who is now a leadership candidate, and bring him to his senses to pass and bring forward amendments to The Grain Stabilization Act so that needed cash flows can come to Western Canada, after the fact, Mr. Speaker.

They made a payout to Ontario wheat producers without any contributions there and there is now close to a billion dollars sitting in the Western Grain Stabilization Fund of government and farmers' money, and no payout being made. We are totally frustrated by the inaction of the Federal Government and we hope that they will move, as the opposition members have indicated in Parliament that they are prepared to give speedy passage to any amendments, we hope that move will take place very shortly. Mandan Line MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to address my question to the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro. Today he's made a couple of remarks regarding dates in the future, 1993 and this fall. I remind him tha t Manito ba Hydro was going to make an 54 announcement in January, February or March. I'm wondering now if he can tell us when that announcement affecting the Mandan Line, when it will be made. Many of my constituents who will be affected by that line have been expecting that decision now for three months. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, I'll certainly take the question as notice and I'll do another check with Hydro and I'll certainly get back to the member. Labour Law Review Report MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I direct my question to the Minister of Labour and would ask her whether she has received the report from Ms. Smith, the consultant to the Labour Law Review, and whether or not she is expecting to table it in this Legislature. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. M.B.

DOLIN: Yes, the government has received the initial report from Marva Smith on Phase I of the Labour Law Review and it is under consideration by Cabinet and caucus at this time. MR. R. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, a last part to that question; will she be tabling it in the Legislature? HON. M.B. DOLIN: Mr. Speaker, that decision has not been taken yet. The report is still under consideration by Cabinet and caucus. When the decision is made, then I will let you know. MR. R. BANMAN: A further que stion to the same Minister.

In light of the fact that she is not prepared to table the document at this time, I wonder if she could inform the House whether she can give this House the assurance that no action will be taken with regard to labour laws in the Province of Manitoba until that report has been tabled and industry, as well as the Legislature, has had a chance to look at it. HON. M.B. DOLIN: Mr.

Speak er, I'm sure that the member, if he speaks to representatives from both the Employers' Association and from the labour side, would know that I have for quite a long time been meeting with them as has Marva Smith and the group, working on the original report. This has been going on through publ ic hearings; it has been going on through consultations since last January. I have also given my word that I will consult with them before the bill is tabled in the Legislature, before it is brought in for first reading and I intend to do that. That will happen within the next month or so.

Since that word has been given and since those people take our word for it, I would suggest that members opposite do the same. Those meetings will be set up in the very near future.

Remembrance Day to Peace Day MR. R. BANMAN: A question to the same Mi nister on a different su bject matter. I wonder if she could inform the House whether or not she is considering changing the name of Remembrance Day to Peace Day? HON. M.B. DOLIN: Mr . Speaker, that is not a consideration before us now, although I will tell the member certainly that I have received some letters to that effect. We have received a number of letters regarding Remembrance Day in general and there have been a number of suggestions about whether it should remain the same, whether it should be changed.

Those will be dealt with in the future; they're not before us now for consideration. Tuberculosis in cattle herds MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourabl e Mi nister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday in my absence, the honourable Member for Roblin Russell raised a· question which was taken as notice on my behalf concerning the farmer in Rossburn who has had the herd of cattle in his yard in quarantine, infested with tuberculosis. Mr. Speaker, I received a report from my department and I will try and give it to the honourable mem ber.

The cattle were tested by the Federal Department of Health of Animals Branch on October 4, 1983 - the test, as it's called, the "Coddlefold" test. Four animals showed a sensitivity to tuberculosis. Two of those animals were slaughtered and it does take four to five months for all the tests to be handled. One animal was negative; the other animal was confirmed as having Avian Tuberculosis. Another type of test was done to further the testing on the animals. lt was the comparative cervical test. That showed several cows with a sensitivity to Avian Tuberculosis.

I am advised that that does not mean that they have tuberculosis but it shows a sensitivity to it. I am advised as well that Avian Tuberculosis is not a health threat to humans or to other animals. lt would take many years for a cow to die from Avian Tuberculosis, I'm advised. Also in terms of threat to the neighbouring cattle and herds, there is very little since it is through saliva and eating together that the threat would be transformed. The disease is spread from animal to animal by saliva, as I've indicated.

If cattle are kept confined in a barn , a cow could over time spread the di sease to a neighbouring cow in a feed-lot situation. This is unlikely, as the cows have been confined in a barn and I am given to understand that the disease takes years to spread. lt is rare for an animal to die from Avian Tuberculosis unless it has had the disease for many years. Tuberculosis transfer between hogs and cattle would be very rare, a very rare occurrence. They would have to be housed together and share the same feed. MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

If the Honourable Mi nister has a lengthy answer, perhaps he would pass the document over to the member who asked the 55 question so as not to abuse the time of the question period. The Honourable Min ister of Agricultu re. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'm just about finished. The honourable member raised a very serious question and a concern in the Rossburn area, Mr. Speaker, and I as well have met with farmers from that area with the same concern, Sir. Chickens with Avian Tuberculosis do not necessarily die and they can have it and die from other causes. I am advised by Mr.

Checkowski, the farmer involved, that cattle were released from quarantine on February 14th. Both federal and provincial veterinarians are certain that there was no connection between the bear baiting of animals and any of the disease problems that the farmer has. Mr. Speaker, the bear-baiting problem that was as well raised is of great concern to myself and my colleague the Mi nister of Natural Resou rces. We're endeavouring to have our staff do what we can to elimina te the dumping of dead carcasses in that area because it is not an occurrence that we agree with at all, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

The time tor Oral Questions having expired, the Honourable Opposition House Leader. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE MR. H. ENNS: Relative to House business, I wonder if I could ask the Minis ter of Finance when he would be prepared to introduce the Budget into this Chamber. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I understand that there is an understanding that we will be finishing with the Throne Speech Debate by this coming Tuesday at 5:30 in the afternoon.

That being the case, I would be prepared to present the Budget on Tuesday the 24th of April at 8 o'clock In the evening. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader on a point of order. HON. A. ANSTETT: No, Mr. Speaker, further to House Business before we enter on the Orders of the Day.

In view of the announcement by the Mi nister of Finance that the Budget will be presented on Tuesday, April 24th, I believe there is agreement with members opposite that, in terms of the actual commencement then of response in the Budget Debate that the House would be prepared to adjourn on Wednesday, April 25th - not sit that day - to adjourn the evening of April 24th, a week tonight until 2:00 p.m. on Thursday the 26th. So, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to announce that the House then will not sit a week tomorrow, April 25th, and also that the Standing Committee on the Rules of the House will meet on Tuesday April 24th at 10:00 a.m. in Room 255. A MEMBER: What about Easter Monday?

Tueaday, 17 April, 1984 HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, I believe the question regarding sitting on Easter Monday was raised, as I recall last Friday, and we agreed that we would be sitting on Easter Monday as has been our·past practice MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. A. ANSTETT: ... Mr. Speaker, I have been in consultatio n with the Opposition House Leader regarding sitting times, sitting arrangements and the Business of the House, and we agreed last week that the House would be sitting Easter Monday. I'm surprised that any members of the House on either side have any concerns now about that.

Two House Leaders have been making those arrangements. I trust they're acceptable to members on both sides. If they aren 't, I'll raise that with the Opposition House Leader and we can reconsider . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. HON. A. ANSTETT: There'll be no complaints. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DE BATE MR. SPEAKER: On the pro posed motion of the Honourable Memb er for Wolseley, the amendment thereto proposed by the Leader of *e Opposition. The debate is open. Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise, Mr. Speaker, to speak on the Throne Speech Debate and the amendments that are proposed by the Leader of the Oppositio n and support the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition party in pointing out to the people of Manitoba the incompetence and the way in which the Province of Manitoba are being governed. The confidence of the public has certainly been shaken and is no longer with this particular government. I will in the next few minutes, Mr.

Speaker, point out my thoughts as to what I think the comparative differences are between the positive action taken during our term of office, some of the things that the current govern ment could be doing, and to develop a meaningful input into the Throne Speech Debate. First of all, I would like to congratulate the mover because she had very little to work with and was able to put in a bit of time by walking around the waterfront or going all over it and trying to defend a government that is pretty well impossible to defend.

Of course, she tried to make it interesting talking about her taxicab trips throughout the country. As well, I want to say to the seconder, that I am left a little bit with some questions unanswered and would hope during the next few weeks of debate in the Legislative Assembly what he and the people that he represents. the Native people of this province, what they really think self-government means so that the people of this Assembly, so that we as an opposition 56 party and the people of Manitoba can get a clear understanding as to their intentions and really what they want. I warn him as well, Mr.

Speaker, that I believe he and his people have been taken into a great deal by the Trudeau Liberals in Ottawa and the Howard Pawleys and the New Democrats in Manitoba; that they had better look very carefully before they move ahead too far with them because I can tell you and tell him, Mr. Speaker, that I think they and his people will be the losers in any negotiations because they don't always come clean with what they talk about and I would want him to be well aware of that. I think the rest of the people of Manitoba could attest to that and back me up on that statement.

As well, on behalf of the people of the Arthur constituency, Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my welcome to the Queen and Prince Philip and to Pope John Paul 11 on his visit this coming summer. I think it's an honour to have them come to our province and I, as I said earlier, want to greet them on behalf of the constituency of Arthur because I know there are many many people from that area looking forward to their visit and an opportunity to be present at the different occasions of which they will be at. I'm extremely pleased that the Queen will pay a visit to the Westman Region, to Brandon.

However, I don't represent that community, but I come very close to it and I'm sure that many many people from all of southern and western Manitoba, as well as the United States, will pay a visit to her when she is in that fair city . So I make those comments as a member for that area and on behalf of the people of the Arthur constituency. In fact, Mr. Speaker, if it had not been for that announcement in the Throne Speech, there would have been very little there of any substance.

That really is the only positive thing and the only major thing that is really going to happen when this government is in office in this coming year by the looks of the rest of the speech . Never has it taken so long to say so little and the leader of our party pointed out very capably yesterday that very fact in many areas.

As I go through my comments, I think it's going to be very obvious that we, as an opposition party representing a large number of people in the province, almost half the people of Manitoba when you look back at the election results, that this government has truly lost the confidence of the people of Manitoba. They have not got a firm sense of direction.

They are at a loss to proceed with legislation that they have passed - I use the seat belt law as an example -it was to have come into effect on the January 1st, but somebody whispered in their ear that it was a bad political move. lt was a bad political move that they should spend $750,000 of the taxpayers' money to show people how to do up their seat belts. Well I have never, Mr. Speaker, in all my life seen such a group of people who pass a law and then don't have the courage of their convictions. As well, Mr.

Speaker, I will be making reference to some issues in agriculture and would be hoping that the Minister of Agriculture would be pointing out where the past Farmlands Protection Act is at, whether or not he is going to proceed to proclaim the act or whether he has taken into account the speeches and the real feelings of Manitobans and discard that bill and start over again to try and encourage people to come and

invest in the province from other parts of Canada and not dis courage the kind of investment that is so badly needed. I will make reference to that again in another

section when I'm dealing more specifically with the agricultural issue. We are seeing, Mr. Speaker, a government that governs by press release and propaganda. When the Min ister of Fina nace was taken to task yesterday by the Member for Turtle Mountain and asking him as to why he circumvented or why he did not live up to the law that he tried to bypass or go around The Financial Administration Act, he said: "R ead my press release." That was his justification for the actions of passing $1.5 billion so he doesn't have to account for the debate in this Legislative Assembly. That was his justification, Mr. Speaker.

You know, never before have we ever seen such an incompetent Minister of Finance and I think the First Minister of this province would be well advised to replace such an incompetent person who is doing the kinds of things that he is doing. He does it with a sleazy approach, Mr. Speaker, one which is hard to accept.

The Throne Speech as we get into it, uses a lot of reference to the Jobs Fund - I know that some of my colleagues will be talking a lot more about it in that particular area - but I want to talk more specifically about the demonstrated incompetence and misguided leadership that this government are giving the institutes or the institutions and those particular organizations tha t relate to or tie dir ectly to the Provincial Government.

The No. 1 issue, of course, that is raised in Western Manitoba has been the way in which the Brandon University has been handled; that in fact the Board of Governors appointed by this particular government have taken action to remove the President of the University and then looked for a reason to do so after. Yes, remove an individual from their job and then look for a reason to do so after.

And there is fairly strong speculation that the reason that it is being done is, that there was an election promise by the Member for Brandon East and the Premier that that kind of action · would take place, that there would be an automatic dismissal of that person after a New Democratic Party was elected and I think it is a shame. lt is a black mark on this government, Mr.

Speaker, that they don't have the courage to have an inquiry, a public inquiry into a public facility that is paid for by the people of Manitoba, that could affect the education of many many people in that province and the name of that particular university . The people of Westman region are extremely upset at the incompetent way in which the Member for Brandon East, which the Premier and his Minister of Education have abrogated their responsibility on the operations of that facility. I condemn them, Mr. Speaker, as do all of Manitoba condemn them in the irresponsible way of handling such an important matter.

They should still, Mr. Speaker, have an inq uiry into the way in which matters have been handled there so that each. and every taxpayer of this province know that there is not an abuse of funds and that there is not someone being treated unfairly. The only way to clear the air would have been to bring it out into the public and have an Inquir y into it. They have seen fit to do otherwise, Mr. Speaker, and will pay the price in those two seats in Brandon, as 57 well as assuring the western regions of this province that there will be Tory members here to represent the people in the Legislature.

The two Brandon seats, Mr. Speaker, the two Brandon seats will come to the Progressive Conservative Party and that will be one of the main issues that will be talked about during the next campaiQn for the next provincial election. That, Mr.

Speaker, is coming a lot sooner than the government would wish. · Let us deal with another issue that has been a scar on this particular government, and that has been the handling, or the mishandling, of McKenzie Seeds under the direct administration or the responsibility - or it was for a certain period of time while it was convenient for him political ly - under the Member for Brandon East who has not stood In his place once and defended himself. He has been muzzled, Mr. Speaker, and why won't he speak out? Why won't they tell the people of Manitoba what the outcome of the RCMP investigations are?

Why aren't we allowed to see what the former manager had to say to the Premier of the province? What is the big cover-up in the McKenzie Seeds issue? Who was implicated? Who was implicated in that particular Issue? They sit very quiet, Mr. Speaker. ,-hey sit very quiet, but we know the people of all of Manitoba, particularly the people of the Brandon region and those two seats in Brandon, know that there's something wrong there. I will tell you, again getting back to the general problem that this government has, that there is no confidence or trust left in them, particularly in the Member for Brandon East.

Of course, the Member for Brandon West knew well enough to bail out from this group of incompetent people who are ruining, not only institutes like the Brandon University or the McKenzie Seeds, but the entire province. He bailed out, Mr. Speaker, because he thought he should be a Cabinet Minister to help them. They may have been well advised to take him in because he might have been able to give them a little bit more light earlier on such issues as the handling of McKenzie Seeds. Mr. Speaker, I want to deal with another current issue.

I want to deal with another current issue that this Min ister of Municipal Affairs has allowed to take place, that this Minister of Agriculture has said he is not responsible for when it comes to the taxation of farm dwellings, taxes imposed on farmers, and how did it come about? How were those farmers selected, Mr. Speaker? They haven't told us; they haven't told us that for some particular reason. Does your name come out of a hat? I expected to be questioned as a Member of the Legislature and as a farmer, as the present Min ister of Agricultur e.

Cer tainly he should be questio.ned as to whether his house should or should not be taxed because of off-farm income. But what about the average farmer whose living along his normal way of life and all at once he gets a letter that reads, you are guilty until you prove your innocence. You are guilty till you prove your innocence when it comes to the taxation of farm homes. When the letter states that you can charge straw as an income to your farm but you can't use hay as an income; if you sell hay that's not a farm income.

What a harassment are we seeing take place with the people of Manitoba? it's an out-and-out outrage that the people have to be ha rassed by such

TUesday, 17 April, 1984 incompetent people as the present Minister of Municipal Affairs, and still we haven't heard the Premier, or the Minister of Agriculture, or the Minister of Municipal Affairs, or anyone else stand and say, they're going to deal with it in a way in which is fair to the people of Manitoba. Why don't they deal with the people in a fair and open manner instead of coming in the back door with a letter that would say that you're guilty until you prove your innocence?

Well, if they think there aren't many people concerned about it, the R.M. of Brenda, the municipality of Brenda, have just forwarded a copy of a resolution to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and I would hope that he would take note of it because there is a meeting as well tonight dealing with this particular issue. I think they should be able to put forward their explanation as to who and as to why they're proceeding in this manner and take a fairly major look at it before they advance any further and harass the people who have to pay these taxes.

Fairness is all the people of this province want, not an underhanded approach by a Minister of the Crown who would force closure on the debate on the major issue that we've seen him do already. That's the kind of Min ister he is. That's the kind of approach he takes, so I guess we can expect it, but we won't stand for it as members of the opposition; we won't stand for it as members representing a community that are already hard pressed. I'll tell you, Mr.

Speak er, there are a great number of young people in our farm communities who are going bankrupt. in fact, this Min ister when he stands and says he holds the record for the greatest Minister of Agriculture; he holds the record all right, the record is the greatest numbers of farm bankruptcies in all of Canada, 400 percent since 1981 in Manitoba. He leads the way; that is his record, Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Agriculture and he stands in this place and is proud of it. He's proud of his record leading the country in farm bankruptcies and that's what he's saying he's proud of. Mr.

Speaker, he is something to behold, I can tell you. I would think that there are many farmers that would like to behold him right in a certain part around the upper part of his body and see what he would have to say then. That is, Mr. Speaker, where we're at. I will say, Mr. Speaker, as well, we have a government - I use that term loosely I know - but it appears that they have harassed everybody in society.

They have harassed the farm community; they have harassed the nurses; they have harassed the taxpayers; they have harassed small business with a payroll tax; they have harassed everyone, but they had to look around to find one more group. Who did they find, Mr. Speaker? They found the Legions that were having bingos; the Kinsmen clubs that were selling raffle tickets; the Lions clubs, all those people that go out and sell tickets and hold bingos for community betterment, to have something in their own community that a service club is proud of. Yet this government said, who haven't we harassed yet?

Who haven't we made feel uncomfortable and help contribute to our funds that we're mismanaging? Ah ha, it is the Legions. They have little bingos out there and they're contributing to the well-being of that community. We should get involved and have them send 58 all their bingo numbers in; we should get in· on the rake-off. And what did they do? There is an uprising out there that they will again have to deal with and I know, talking to my colleagues, that the people aren't going to stand for it.

The only way in which they can correct the measure is at an election time, and the people are on hold, the people are on hold. They are saying in all these announcements we heard, what did we hear in the last part of the last Session that went on for three years, what did we hear? There were some of these annou ncements tha t we're rehearing again now about these federal-provincial agreements and we're hearing all these great annou ncements.

Again today they're applauding themselves and patting themselves on the back for an agreement thl\t'S going to come, or some kind of a Letter of Intent that's coming into effect in 1993. Well that's pretty cold comfort for the 40-some-thousand people that are looking for a job right now. How are they going to live that long under this kind of an ill guided group of people? Well I can tell you, they aren't waiting very long either, just till the next election and they can mark their "X" to turf out these people who promised them a great future, a no-business loss. That's what they're waiting for.

They're not interested in your hydro announcement because it's too long, too far down the road. You won't be here to turn the power on, to see the first light bulb lit from that power agreement, if in fact it ever does take place. So I say they have alienated everyone. They're digging into the purses of the little old men and women and young people who want to go and play bingo and have some fun - they thought they would get the hand of government into that as well. Is that really all they have to do?

Why aren't they employing themselves with something that has some meaning to it instead of harassing the people of this province? I don't believe they even know how to run a bingo and that's what the people of the Legions are saying, why are they again on our backs? Why don't they get off our backs? Let us deal for a few minutes, because we are In a time of - I would not say economic recovery -I would say that in Manitoba we are in a continuation of a recession, that we see record numbers of people unemployed. What happened during the Progressive Conservative years prior to the NDP?

And I want to make reference to a few of the things that actually took place, not because we falsely promoted a Jobs Fund that would create a job for a day or two days. We're not against those jobs, but what we were working for and demonstrated could be done under the proper economic policies and strategies was to put in place policies that encourage private investment for long term job creation and economic activity.

One only has to look west to the boundary of Saskatchewan and Manitoba, where Manitoba and Saskatchewan elevator companies, farmer-owned producer companies under a Progressive Conservative Government built an oil seed crushing plant at Harrowby, Manitoba - 40 jobs for long term, $40 million investment and look at the number of farmers who are selling commodity to that. Some 3,000 farmers are producing canola for that plant and sunflowers for the plants in Altona, expanded to do the kind of service that was needed. That's what we call agriculture economic development. That's what we call Manitoba

TuHdaJ, 17 April, 1984 development and everyone gets advantages from that, Mr. Speaker, the trucking industry, the combine industry. The Minister of Agriculture turns his back and says, well, I'll be damned. That's really all he's interested in, some real economic activity in the province. That's what he thinks about the people of this province. Let us move further east, Mr. Sp eaker , to my colleague's community of Minnedosa where we saw the startup of an alcohol producing plant made from agriculture commodities. Yes, Mr.

Speaker, and I happen to be fortunate enough to have the opportunity to market some of my grain corn to that facility. I think it's a tremendous thing for people to be able to do that. And what did that do? That didn't give a person a job for a day; that gave long-term employment; gave a commitment to those people of that area that they would be there to pay them for the work they did, to buy grain from many many farmers to take the by product to produce animal feeds. That's the kind of development.

And how did it take place? lt took place because there was a government that had the will to take the taxes off the initial years to get them going. lt wasn't a tax subsidy at all; it was just common sense, darned good government. The member from the United States now sitting here beside me should pay a little more attention to some of the home grown kinds of activities that can take place. - (Interjection) - I'm not anti-American at aiL Let us look at another one. You know, this is qui te a story. We drive on forward, further east, and we see the other side of the coin.

We've seen Imperial Oil where they've built a magnificent fertilizer plant at Bloom right by Portage la Prairie , employing people, servicing people, the farm community, providing long-term jobs. And yes, who built that? lt was Gerry Fullerton, who this government hired to do things for the government. Well, we're paying him $85,000 a year, but I haven't seen any more development. He was a great man with the private sector, but he kind of went into his shell when he got into the government. Where is the production from this man?

What it proves is that the private initiative, the private incentive and the company that has provided the funds and put his ideas together worked, out what he is doing now is I'm sure he is spinning his wheels. I, Mr. Speaker, have no personal reflection, in fact I want to compliment that individual for the work he did in the private sector because it was worthwhile, long-term investment for the people of Manitoba. They're paying taxes and they're helping this community. Those are the kinds of hard, real things that the governments can do to encourage people to come. But, no, Mr.

Speaker, the government are bound and bent they're going to fool the people and they won't with a Jobs Creation Fund. My goodness. the people of Manitoba see these huge green signs. Well, they use them as dart boards. They've got the picture of the Premier on the one end and the back end of a mule on the other and they're throwing darts at it. it's called "pin the jail on the donkey ... That's the only meaningful job that has been created that I have seen. He is making a laughingstock of himself and his government, advertising things that really don't mean a lot to the people.

I just ho pe that this government some day wakes up and realizes that the people who really put their ambitions forward and take some private initiative that in the long term that's what 59 give you stability, that's what gives you the kind of province that I'm sure the majority of the people want to live in. Let us take a minute and look at what the thrust has been from this present government. Today, the Minister of Energy and Mines makes a big to-do about people doing things, helping people - you know, Manitoba Hydro - a!; if he invented or created Manitoba Hydro.

We all know the story of Manitoba Hydro and all he and his former governments have done was degrade it and destroy it and mismanage it. I'm not against the announcement that was made today, but why In 1993? That's again cold comfort for those people who are looking for a job in the next year or two - cold comfort, nine years of starvation. Yes, nine years of starvation won't be there because we will soon be in office to help to create other meaningful jobs and an environment that will help. The other major thrust of this government in the resource field, of course, is ManOil. What are we hearing from ManOil?

Well, the Minister of Energy comes out and he says, ManOil has to participate in the new pipeline with Inter-City Gas. We have a pipeline being built in southwest Manitoba and I can tell you, he's not going to get off with just bui: jing a pipeline and leaving the roads In the condition they are. They're deplorable and there have to be millions of dollars put into the rebuilding and the upgrading of the roads that have already been taken down because of the heavy weights of oil transportation.

That is going to cost the government as well and I would have hoped that he would have been able to put the funds that he's now putting into ManOil and now putting Into the pipeline, rather than Investing it in those businesses that aren't going to do the province a lot of good; put it into the infrastructure that would give you long-term jobs. I would like the Minister of Highways some day to come forward and tell us how many man-hours of work or woman-hours of work does it take to build a decent highway in this province? That's a long-term, meaningful job. But you know what they're doing?

They're taking money out of those meaningful areas and putting it into the Jobs Fund so that they get a gain , a news release out. The propaganda machine says, look at the jobs the Jobs Fund is creating. Well, the jobs are costing us money, and not creating any infrastructure, not giving us a lot of production. We have to get back to basics, we have to build this country from a foundation that is solid and build it on a system of good policies, and they aren't doing it. • I want to deal just briefly with the issue of the pipeline in the southwest. He makes all these gr andiose announcements.

He has not, to my knowledge, talked to the local people. I know, I'm involved. The pipeline, they shot an arrow and it happened to go over part of my farm. Well, I'm not worried , Mr. Speaker, because they've looked after all the farmers and everybody. They've passed

an act, the Minister of Municipal Affairs or one of the government, that they would automatically expropriate everybody's property and then settle with them afterwards. Yes, there's a recent regulation change put in place that expropriation takes place and then they worry about coming to talk to the farmers. I want my colleagues to take a look at that, as the government better understand it - the government expropriation - and then they come and say - (Interjection) - Yes,

1\Jeaday, 17 April, 1984 it's the old socialist system that you establish a price. Well, I think they'd better walk very carefully with that one because there are going to be some extremely severe criticism come forward with this approach. Why didn't the Minister of Energy and Mines hold hearings? Why didn't he come out and inform the public? He sat in his office in Winnipeg and said, well, we're giving this pipeline to Inter-City Gas, the government have to be 25 percent owner and we're going to shoot an arrow from Waskada to Cromer.

Why didn't they take the pipeline to Coulter, to Lyleton, to Pierson, to Tilson and, on the route, pick up all the oil in the southwest? Or is that part of their plan? Are they going to put a feeder line in? The people don't know. What are they doing when they go across the Souris River, we know that pipelines break? Souris take their drinking water out of the Souris River. Are they going to make a fail-safe mechanism that won't allow any seepage out of that pipeline into the river system?

These are questions that the people want to know - (Interjection) - The Minister says, where does it go through? it goes through Manitoba and there was proper work done ahead of time. They didn't play the propaganda and the press release game, they dealt honestly and fairly with the people. But you have not dealt once honestly and fairly with the people of Manitoba and, if you have, I challenge you to stand in your place and tell us when it is your turn to speak, Mr. Speaker.

Let us look for a few minutes at the agricultural industry and, as this Minister says, he's the best Minister that Manitoba has seen - well he holds the record for the greatest number of farm bankrupt cies in the province, 400 percent increase over the past few years, and not stopping, Mr. Speaker, and he's doing nothing to stop it. What is happening to our cream shippers, the small farmer who has decided to go and milk cows and ship cream to our creameries? They've run out of quota. And what is he doing about it? He's just sitting back saying, well, that's too bad, we can't get any more quota.

Why doesn't he get more quota? He makes reference in the Throne Speech to the fact that he has to improve the national marketing schemes. Is he prepared to take the position that if he doesn't get corrective measures within the national marketing scheme tha t Ma nitoba will pull out? I challenge him to answer that question. Will he pull out of the national marketing schemes if he doesn't get some improvement for the farmers of Manitoba? That's what I want to know. Will the broiler producers - can they expect him to deal with a tough hand when it comes to dealing with the federal agency?

Will he back out if he can't continue to get the kind of response we need for the egg producers? Will he look after his own farm, the turkey producers? Will he go forward at least and make sure they get a fair deal? And if they don't, will he meaningfully offer to pull out of the national scheme? These are questions that I would hope he would answer when he responds to the Throne Speech. But what are his priorities? He's touring the province now to sell Manitoba crop insurance. Well, the farmers are sold on Manitoba crop insurance, have been for years. He's got one particular problem, Mr.

Speaker, because his own farmers in the lnterlake are paying a little too high a premium and he's trying to figure out how he can get the other farmers in the rest of the 60 province to help him pay the premiums - the old socialist philosophy, he's going to try and equalize them. I have no problem with him taking a look at crop Insurance and the premiums, but why doesn't he have someone do it for him? He toured through my community, a great idea having the Min ister of Agriculture - I think there were four or five - I wish he had let me know and I could have gone and helped add to the crowd.

They were really interested in having the Minister come, but he was talking about a subject that they weren't interested in. We'd already done the kind of work on crop insurance and were moving toward the kind of recommendations, so he's now trying to think it's a major priority. it's not a major priority. I have some other areas of concern as well, Mr. Speaker. They �ontinue to blow and to brag about $40 million going into stabilization, but we will be putting forward Orders for Return.

We will be asking questions as to how many people have been paid for administering the Beef Income Plan; how many cattle have been handled; what is the cost of that total enterprise; what has gone into administration; who has got the money; what farmers have benefited from it? Here again, I had a call today from a farmer who said, "You know, I joined the Minister of Agriculture's Beef Income Plan and I didn't sell my calves last year because he wants me to keep them and fatten them." But you know what he said happened?

"Because I didn't sell my calves last year and I got a surface lease for the use of an oil well coming on my land taking away my crop production," he said, "I'm now in a position where I've got a greater income from off the farm than I have for my farm." He said, "I'm really getting help from the NDP Government. I don't sell my calves and get any money. Now I get a notice that I'm having to pay a tax on my house." What the dickens is this government doing? Do they know? I plead with them to at least meet with the Minister of Mun icipal Affairs, with other Ministers, the Surface Rights Board.

I plead with them to meet with them, at least give some common sense to the kind of actions they're taking. I've never in my life seen such an ill-advised and misguided group of people trying to run a government. Mr. Speaker, I know that time eats up very quickly and I had not intended to take the full time because really I'm not speaking about what's in the Throne Speech, I'm speaking about what should have been in the Throne Speech and the direction the government should have been taking. I have to deal for a minute in the area of health and social programs.

How many times have you seen in the papers in the last year, health system in crisis? Life and limb are in danger because of the way this group of people are administering our health services. And what is their priority? You know, there's a hidden line in this Throne Speech, "Reproductive Services." Does it mean we're going to have Henry Morgentaler and his clinic developed in this province? Is that what it means? Tell us, tell us that it isn't if it isn't. Why don't they come forward and tell us what their policies are?

You know, I want to deal again just briefly with the agriculture picture because I would have thought this Minister and his government would have protested a lot more haughtily than they did the removal or the reduction of initial gr ain prices. I'm ext remely

Tueedar, 17 April, 1984 disappointed, as are the people of Manitoba, that there wasn't a word out of them, particularly when the Premier is passing accolades to the Member for Fort Rouge - I'm sorry, what's the federal seat that Axworthy represents? - (I nterjection) - Winnipeg Fort Garry. The First Minister comes in and immediately holds his hand and says, oh, you're a great guy, you're putting money into Northern Manitoba and we just love you. At the same time that same Cabinet Minister is allowing the initial grain prices to go down. I can't understand them.

By the way, we have a new Liberal Leader that we see around here once in a while. You know, it's quite interesting that her name is Carstairs -and I'm sure she'll remain upstairs for the rest of her political career in this place. Carstairs will remain upstairs and I think it's very very fitting that she has that kind of name.

We've had a former Liberal Leader spend their whole political career upstairs and this one happens to be - (Interjection) - Well, I'l l tell you, particularly coming from the mouth of the woman from Wolseley-with that kind of a comment, I'd get nervous. 1 want to touch briefly because there is a positive move taking place in the North. I do believe that the Port of Churchill is a major port and has to be developed. I don't believe it's the provincial responsibility to put money into it. I don't believe that the funds that go into the harbour development should be provincial money.

I believe it should be federal money and 1 would hope that this government hasn't been snookered by their friend, the Member for Fort Garry. But we don't have to worry about the Member for Winnipeg Fort Garry much longer, because he's going to be replaced by a very competent colleague of mine, Bud Sherman, who's going to use to his advantage the connection between the Howard Pawley government and the present Member for Winnipeg Fort Garry. That is the kiss of death to the Member for Winnipeg Fort Garry, to hold hands with the present Premier and his Cabinet colleagues - and you just watch it happen, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speak er, I think it's impo rtant that we, as members of the opposition, put forward positive sugge stions and comments for this particular government. The first thing I would suggest again and reiterate, is to try to do something to make the people of Manitoba have a little bit of confidence that there is some form of guidance and leadership at the head of state. I know it's impossible but at least try, because we are In tough times, and at least show some demonstration of concern and common goal.

They don't trust you, and I don't believe they ever will. 1 believe that the most honourable thing that the Premier of the province and his colleagues could do would be to give the people of Manitoba the opportunity to mark their feelings on a ballot, call an election so they can put forward their wishes and send the members of the opposition In as government to bring things back to some common-sense order in the province. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER, P. Eyler: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I must say I'm particularly pleased to be able to speak 61 on the Throne Speech on this particular day, especially pleased because I must say the announcement made by the Minister responsible for energy earlier today certainly has to be a tremendous announcement, not only for my constituents but this province as a whole. 1t couldn't come at a more appropriate time too, when we're debating the Throne Speech, because I think it shows already just how accurate and how appropriate the Throne Speech was when it talked of the Manitoba economy and the recovery and new opportunities that we have. it particularly emphasized that one of the governme nt's top objectives was to create new economic development initiatives, Mr.

Speaker. I can't think of anything that could fit into that category more than that announcement today. What I'm particularly pleased about is the fact that the Minister is also working on various other potential projects which would involve additional sales of hydro. I think that is also good news because it shows that there Is a continuing long-term planning process that is looking, not just at today, but our future in this Province of Manitoba. Lest anybody on the opposition side knocked down just exactly what we're talking about, let's review what the Minister said only today in this House.

He said that we have a $3.2 billion hydro sale to the Northern United States, that's $3.2 billion, Mr. Deputy Speaker. it's a long-term sale, 12 years. lt's rather a unique one in Manitoba histor y. it's certainly something that is excellent news for this province. Wt>en we look at it, it means that we can start looking at discussing the resumption of Limestone and let's not forget what that means. That means 17 ,000 �rson-years of employment. it means a multlbillion dollar investment in this province. 1t means great economic benefits for the North of this province and the rest of the province as a whole.

Now, I didn't hear that coming from the opposition critic on this matter today in the Legislature. I didn't hear it coming from the Mem ber for Arthur, who just spoke. I heard nothing more than sour grapes coming from him and I think I know why. What better contrast between this government and their s than that announcement today? They did nothing with Hydro. Pardon me, pardon me -they shut it down. They put the mothballs on Limestone. They shut down the entire North for four years. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. The Honourable Member for Lakeside on a point of order. MR. H.

ENNS: it is contrary to our Rules to allow deli berate untruths to be entered into the public journals. it is an established fact, established by Order in-Council, by the then New Democratic Party Government, that shut down the Hydro construction in August of 1977, two full months before a Conservative Administration came into office. So let not the Member for Thompson reiterate that kind of a myth. it was a New Democratic Party that shut down the construction on the Nelson River. it is in the prospectus that the Minister of Finance took down to New York to raise money in 198 1 when they came back.

'RieedaJ, 17 April, 1114 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please. A difference of opinion between members as to the facts of the case does not constitute a point of order. The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the honourable member can quibble as he does there. I would like to have him explain that to my constituents. I would like to have him explain exactly what that government did for the North in terms of hydro development or any other economic development for the entire four years in which they were in office. The answer is clear - it was nothing.

That's one of the reasons I was elected in 1981 and why five out of the five Northern seats are represented by New Democrats. As I said, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it's a particularly signif icant day today. I think it's a turning point economically for this province. We've been through some tough times. We were through some particularly tough times when that bunch across the way were in office. We were in some particularly tough times when we were hit by the most major economic recession that we've seen since the Great Depression. There were some pretty tough times.

The government responded, we responded and we made no bones about it. We brought in some particularly badly needed short-term economic projects, leading up to the Jobs Fund which has created many short-term jobs in this province. We've made no bones about that. We said that that was necessary; it was necessary to cushion the economy of this provi nce from the worst effects of the international recession. lt was necessary to get people to work while we could work on these long-term job creation projects which ultimately are our goal and I would hope all Manitobans' goal, and the results I think are pretty clear.

You just have to look at the current economic record. You know, we, for many years, Mr. Deputy Speaker, have had varying different unemployment rates, but we've usually come in about third. Unde r this government, we're consistently second and just two weeks ago we were first - the lowest unemployment rate in Canada. Now they can twist that around any way they want, but it speaks the fact that we're doing better than the Conservative Government of Saskatchewan. We're doin g better than the Conservative Government of Alberta. I mention those two governments because those provi nces have traditionally been lower.

When the Saska tchewan Government was NDP, it was the lowest in the country. Now they have a Conservative Government. Their unemployment rate shot up by .8 percent. Is that their version of "open for business?" That's what the Premier there said when he was elected. They're open for business. I don't know about that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I think the record speaks otherwise. Let's go a little further about the exact statistics. We know that we have the lowest rate in Canada. How does it stack up in terms of job creation? We've created approximately 9,000 jobs, Mr.

Speaker, more than we had in 1981 when we were elected. That's pretty significant. Let's look at some other measures. Our overall employment has grown by over 1 percent. We had that growth at the time when the rest of the country had negative growth in employment. 62 Another factor that has to be looked at is the growth of population in this province since we took office. When they were in office, we all know what happened. I know what happened in my community. We went from about 22 ,000 people down to about 13,500.

At that time the Premier, Premier Lyon, didn't even know that that was going on, but my constituents certainly did. Our population just plummeted. But what has happened since and NDP Government has been in? Has it continued to go down, Mr. Deputy Speaker? No. Has it stayed the same? No, it's gone up.

Thanks to the programs that we've introduced already, the population in Thompson has increased by as much as 1,000. it's coming because of new facilities, new educational programs, new economic initiatives. lt's coming for a whole series Qf reasons, but I think the bottom line of it is that we finally have a government that is doing something for the North. For four years we had a government that was doing nothing. Now that's only thus far. That's before the announcement today. I will say now for the record, Mr.

Deputy Speak er, that I fully expect that process to continue and to accelerate over the next couple of years as announcements such as the one today and other announcements which I hope to see become a reality in the next period of time bring back that sense of confidence, that sense of growth that we had in the North under the Schreyer Government, that sense that we lost under the Lyon Tory Government. 1 say that for the record, Mr. Deputy Sp eaker, as I have every confidence that this will Indeed happen. Let's look at some other contrasts.

Let's go beyond perhaps my constituency focus to see exactly what difference we're seeing here between the government and the members of the opposition. Let's look at the approach that they've followed the last two years since they've been in opposition. Let's look at some of the comments they've made in the debate on the Throne Speech thus far. Let's look at some of the comments they've made about that announcement today. I think what will become apparent to anybody who looks at the record is that this Conservative Party is wedded totally to the past.

They have a conception of politics that extends little beyond political opportunism, Mr. Speaker, political opportunism of the worst kind. Let me quote one specific example. The Leader of the Opposition, in a speech in this House in February, accused the NDP Government of taking away people's freedom. He had listed a number of things. lt's a standard Tory rhetoric that you hear in speech after speech after speech. But there was one that struck me as particularly interesting. He said, the NDP Government had taken away people's freedom by bringing in seat belts.

Now if I'd heard that from the Member for Arthur 1 would have said that's consistent with what he says. If I'd heard that from some of the other members I would have said that's consistent. Something struck me as being rather funny about that statement. He voted for seat belts in this House; he voted for it along with the Member for Fort Garry. Now he's coming along and saying, oh, the government's done such a terrible thing by taking away freedom. Mr. Deputy Speaker, you can be on one side of the Issue; you can be on the other side.

The Federal Liberals sit on the fence, but you can't be on both sides of the issue at the same

Tue•day, 17 April, 1984 time. - (Interjection) - One of the members on this side suggested there is one member over there who's an expert at being on both sides of the issue. I suspect that it does go beyond the Leader 6f the Opposition. I suspect that he typifies the approach of members opposite on this particular issue and on other issues as well. But I really think that is lacking in political integrity. I think it's downright hypocritical. lt was bad enough that the Leader of the Opposition got up and made that statement in this House, but only a month later he made the same statement in Thompson.

I can tell you, I've told a number of my constituents about exactly where the Leader of the Opposition stood on that particular issue. I can tell you what their response was, both from those who support the compulsory use of seat belts and those who oppose it. They said, that's hypocritical. That's going to come back to haunt the Leader of the Opposition and the members opposite in the next little while. That's only one example. Let's talk about another example of how they are wedded to the past.

Let's talk about the Leader of the Opposition's speech just a few days ago - in fact, yesterday - in terms of the Speech from the Throne. Let's talk about the kind of priority he saw in terms of the kind of announcement we came out with today. He said, "I find that interesting," and this is a quote from Page 40, Monday, 16 April, 1984 "because on the scale of priorities, selling energy to the Americans is undoubtedly the third preference. it's never been that strong an alternative, Mr. Speaker." That's a direct quote. That's what the Leader of the Opposition said only yesterday.

I quote again, "it's never been that strong an alternative." Maybe that's why they didn't get anywhere with hydro development for four years. Maybe that's why. Right here, the Leader of the Opposition who was a member of that government, a member of the Cabinet, says it wasn't an alternative that they considered to be a high priority. As the Minister responsible for Energy said today, we looked at all the alternatives. We didn't put our eggs in one basket. We didn't go after some of the maybe mega projects that those members opposite talked about. We didn't go after pipe dreams. We looked at all the alternatives.

I think that approach, that fundamentally di fferent approach is one of the reasons we have that 500 megawatt announcement today, that sale to the United States and why they didn't come up with anything for four years. That's another example. Let's go on to yet another one as typified by the Member for Arthur. He just got up a few minutes ago and said how he supported the development of the Port of Churchill but he was against the province putting any money into it. I've heard that before; I heard it from the former Leader of the Opposition. He stated that on a numb er of occasions.

I heard it from various members when they were criticizing our so-called "wish" list. I heard that. They said, we should not be putting money into that. Well that's a traditional sort of approach , I sup pose. You can set very strict boundar ies between the Federal and Provincial Governments and you can say that's none of our responsibil ity. You go ahead and do it; we'll talk about it; we won't do anything about it. Well, this government took a different approach.

We realized that to get the Port of Chur chill developed, to get those other Northern development 63 agreements, to make them a reality, we had to put our money where our mouth was. By taking that different approach, we have been able to come up with a package of economic development initia tives of Northern development initia tives that is unparalleled in this province, and it's the model for the rest of this country. I think that's important to stress because it certainly is, I think, unique for this country. But there are other approaches which typify their approach even on this particular issue as well.

The Member for Pembina got up a few months back and said, this is really great to hear this announcement about Churchill but we did so much when we were in office. We held a bunch of meetings. Really, Mr. Deputy Speaker, they held a bunch of meetings. I'm sure they had meetings on a lot of other things but does that member really think that that was a solution? Is he really going to compare the commitment we've made, the real commitment in investment, the real dollar commitment this Provincial Government has made with his meetings? I can understand why he might have had meetings.

I know the difficulty that his party has had in terms of the Port of Churchill with such members they have as their federal member, Mr. Murta, who's been on record as being opposed to the Port of Churchill for sometime. Perhaps they needed the meetings just to straighten his own colleagues out. I really think that if he thinks anybody's going to take that seriously that he ought to have his head examined. I don't think anybody in my constituency will take that comment seriously. I mean, if he cares to come up there I think he would be laughed out of Thompson with a suggestion such as that. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Chased out of Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Oh, chased out. The Premier says he'd be chased out of Thompson. I think he and his colleagues were already chased out In 1981 and I think they will be again if they come up with the same sort of approaches. Well, that's another example, that's just another example of how they're wedded in the past. And, you know, to a certain extent I will say that they have changed somewhat over the last couple of years but, if any thing, they've changed by becoming more arrogant.

They are an incredibly arrogant bunch right now, you can hear them, the comments they make whether it be in personal attacks or other attacks on this government. They think that they will be the next government, they have this sort of sense that they've been blessed from above, a devine right to govern; that's the word, the devine right to govern, they think they have it. The Minister of Municipal Affairs points out quite accurately they've lost three out of the last four elections, and next time it's going to be four out of five, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, because they know that from this point on they have nowhere to go but down, and we have nowhere to go but up. They know that, they know that for eight years under the Sch reyer government people recognized that we were the party that could deliver short and long-term jobs. They know that they did nothing for four years on either count; they know that we have already established the fact

1Ueedey, 17 April, 1884 that we can deliver on short-term jobs, and they know that with announcements such as the one that has been made today that people will recognize clearly that the NDP is the party that stands for both short-term and long-term jobs development. So there's a party that's wedded in the past, and my com parison between the ND P and the Conservatives, up to this point in time today, I believe, I have established clearly that they are a party that does not have a vision even of today, let alone the future. They can't even recognize what is happening today.

You should have seen the looks on their faces when the Minister responsible for energy made that announcement. My God, there were about three people applauding, three people recognized this as good for the rest of Manitoba. The rest of them were going, my God, there goes my chance of getting in the Cabinet, we're not going to win this election if there's anything more like this. You could see the reaction on their faces.

You know, it was that political opportunism; it works great when you're riding the crest of the waves, but when the tide turns and it starts slipping away that's when it really starts to hit you, and I think the members opposite got hit today. They started realizing that it is beginning to slip away. What seemed like a sure thing in that speech from the Leader of the Opposition yesterday, that sure thing, that arrogance, that devine right to govern, that idea that the Conservatives are going to be back in power, all these guys across the way are going to get those Cabinet posts they want.

You know, it started fading a bit, and I can tell you it's going to fade a hell of lot more in the upcoming months. - (Interjection) - Well, let's talk about it, let's talk about the difference between a party wedded in the past and a party that has paid attention to the present needs of Manitoba. And let's go one step beyond, let's talk about the future.

You know, in the entire one-and-a-half hour speech from the Leader of the Opposition I don't think I heard one mention of the future, I don't think I heard one possible idea that could be construed as a vision of how Manitoba should be in the upcoming year, in the next five years, in the next 10 years. Let's look at it. In 16 years we'll be entering a new century. Let's look at it, in 16 years we'll be in the 21 st century. You know, where are we going in that period of time, where are we going. We even had the Member for Arthur say about this hydro sale: Oh, that's 1992, 1993.

Little does he know or apparently he's forgotten that to get those sales we'd have to construct something before then and that will mean jobs for them. But, apart from that, he says 1992 and 19 93, let's not talk about it. Mr. Speaker, I say, let's start talking about that, let's start talking about the approach that we have to look at. Let's first of all look at the No. 1 problem in this province and in this country at the present time, that of unemployment. As I' ve demonstrated earlier we now have the lowest rate of unemployment in the country, but it's clearly too high. What is the reason for that?

Well, the reason is obvious. We have structural unemployment, we have structural unemployment both here in this province and structural unemplo yment in Canada as a whole. In fact, we are not alone, internationally it has become the growing problem of all countries. What it means is that despite economic recovery certain sectors of society do not 64 benefit from that recovery, certain people , · certain sectors of society remain unemployed despite the fact that the economy as a whole develops and grows.

You know it's a theme that has been stressed by the Federal New Democratic Party of sharing in that recovery and it really comes down to the same sort of root, the fact that we are leaving a large group of people behind, even when we do get economic recovery. So let's talk about that, let's talk about that No. 1 problem. Is it unsolvable? I don't think so, I don't think it's unsolvable at all if we take an innovative look at work, if we take an innovative look at the workplace.

Now the government has started in this area, we've started in a number of significant ways, we've started in terms of setting the example within the Civil Service in terms of fle�t time and job sharing, which is a very innovative way of looking at working time and sharing of jobs between people. We've done the same in terms of emphasizing the need for better training because that is certainly part of it, you know, recognizing the fact that people may have to work at two, or three, or more careers during your lifetime.

We've emphasized the need to look at pensions, In particular early retirement, because of the fact that it provides a just return to those people who have given their life working for this province and at the same time opens up new opportunities for young people. That's what we've started to do in terms of work, terms of the workplace. We've emphasized our feelings that there should be greater co-operation in the workp lace between employers and employees, of getting greater participation of the employees in the functioning of that enterprise.

Really what we've talked about is what some people call industrial democracy, I prefer to call it economic democracy. And, you know, lest anybody think that these are dangerous new ideas, or these are particularly radical, I think you just have to look at some countries where they've begun to Introduce these things in a much wider scale than we have here to see just how valuable this creative approach to the problem of unemployment can be.

I'll just show you one example, and this I think is particularly indicative of the kind of creative problem solving approach you can have when you talk about structural unem ployment. In Europe they have one program whereby they take a person who is over 55 who might consider early retirement, other than the fact that he or she might face financial penalties; they offer that person a compensation for whatever financial penalties they would pay for early retirement.

What they do is they take that job and they take two unemployed young people and they put those two unemployed young people Into that job, splitting the work and for the rest of the week those unemployed young people then are put on a training program so that they get both experience and training. Now what happens for society as a whole is that there is an additional cost in terms of the subsidy to the person who has retired early. That is a cost.

But on the other side you also have two young people who might otherwise be on the equivalent there of Unemployment Insurance or welfare who now are not being a burden on society and who are getting the kind of experience and training they need. Now that's the kind of thing that we should really be looking at here in Manitoba.

Tuesday, 17 April, 1984 That's the way in which we can really solve the problem of structural unemployment. it's not with any one panacea, but with a whole series of new approaches based on a flexible concept of the whole questron of unemployment. That's one area of particular concern. Let's look at some other areas. Let's look at the whole area of education. Right now, we have a fairly well-developed education system in Manitoba. We have three universities; we have our community colleges; we have our secondary school system.

But there are some serious problems - and I hate to use the same term again - but I would suggest there are some serious structural problems in the access to education despite the fact that we have these facilities. I just look at the situation in my own constituency. The percentage of young people in my constituency and the percentage of adults who are able to continue their education is far below that of people in the City of Winnipeg or the City of Brandon.

Despite the fact that we are perhaps even somewhat better off than people in the rural areas because we do have some programs available, we still suffer from a major problem in having that access to education. Now what is the reason for that? Well, it's pretty simple. If you're in the City of Winnipeg, you can stay at your parent's home and go to university for about $1 ,000 a year, if you include tuition, books and bus fare. If you're from Thompson, it costs you $4,000 a year because you also have to pay for your living costs and your transportation costs.

For rural people, there's a similar cost; while transportation is not as high, people from rural areas are also faced with the same barr ier. As a result, they just don't go. 1 can say that one other factor which is also causing a major problem is that many people are now having to call on their parents. When I graduated from high school, I worked at lnco. I made my money at lnco during the summer and I could go to university and just about break even at the end of the year . That opportunity has not been there in recent years. In many rural areas, that opportunity has never been there.

The result is that many people who would otherwise go for a university or community college education just don't go. Now, that's in terms of young people. Let's talk about adult education. Over the last year, there's been a major change in terms of adult education in this province and across this country. There has been a far greater number of part-time students, of adults, mature students continuing their education than there ever was in the past.

In fact, it's gotten to the point where there are as many part-time students in continuing education as there are in full-time studies from young people coming after high school. Now, that's in the city. Working outside of the city, it doesn't work that way. If you're in rural Manitoba, there is nothing except correspondence courses and even then you can only take two courses at a time. There's no access for other kinds of training either. You just don't have that chance. it's the same thing in the North.

We have in Inter Universities North, for example, which offers a very limited number of courses and you'll virtually never be able to get a degree program. Does that have to be the way, Mr. Speaker? That's the question I ask. The answer I come up with on that is no, because there are some innovative ways in which 65 we can offer further education to people, but it has to be based on two premises. The first one is, instead of taking people to the education, taking the education to the people, a very simple concept but something that is badly needed.

What I'm talkin g about is decentralizing our community college, decentralizing our univ ersities, being able to offer courses In communities. lt extends further to having mobile classrooms. We can always offer upgrading for technical courses right at the work site. We have the technology there, we just need to follow through and use some of that technology and the innovative ideas. We can go further, talk about distance education and thanks to satellite technology, we can now offer courses in virtually any community in this province and it won't be simply a videotape type of course.

With satellite technology, we can take one professor in Winnipeg, we could have students across the province taking a course who would then be able to take the lesson and ask questions of that particular professor, much in the same way as they would do if they were in a classroom situation. There are also other technologies that can be used, for example, computers. There are many courses which could be run as computer-assisted courses with a professor, at a central location in Winnipeg offering those courses to people throughout the province.

When I talk about it, I'm talking not just about the North, despite the fact that we probably face some of the biggest handicaps, I'm talking about the whole province. I think the idea of the Inter-Universities North Program should be expanded both in terms of its area to be basically Inter-Universities Manitoba, and in terms of its abil ity to offer programs using some of the technology that I have mentioned. I think, given that kind of a new creative approach, we can bring rural and Northern Manitobans up to the same level of access as the rest of the province. I think that's important.

We're talking about young people getting out of high school. We're also talking about people who, because of their marital situation or because their roots are in a certain area, just can't move to Winnipeg to get a university course or to get a community college course. I personally think they deserve just as much opportunity for that access as other people in this province. That's one area. Let's talk about another one. Let's talk about health care.

For years we've concentrate on developing a health care system which emph asizes hospital care and intensive care at fairly major cost to this country and to this province, and I think with some good results. But let's look at ways in which we can expand that. I look at the situation in the North. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: The Honourable Member for Turtle Mountain on a point of order. MR. B. RANSOM: Some of us on this side are trying to listen to the Member for Thompson. If his colleagues on the government side don't wish to listen to him, perhaps they should hold their meetings outside the House. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Me mb er for Thompson.

Tueedq 17 April, 1984 MR. S. ASHTON: Well, if anybody knows me, Mr. Speaker, they will know that my colleagues have heard this many times before in the past and they're going to hear it many times in the future. As I was saying, in terms of health care, when I look at the situation in my particular area, I see once again some structural problems.

We have a system which concentrates on transporting people to Winnipeg -at great cost, I might add -because a lot of treatment is not available in the North, not because the budgets aren't there, but largely because we're unable to attract people into our hospitals to act as specialists in those areas. What I would like to see is more concentration on areas such as Thompson becoming regional centres and some pretty significant financial incentives being established so that we can have those specialists and that we can concentrate on having that level of service available to people in that area.

But beyond that, I think we have to integrate hospital care with health care and community care in general. You know, if you look at the budget that a provincial government has for health care and community services in general, you will find that it goes far beyond hospital service even now. If you look at public health nursing, for example, there is just one example where we have a fairly extensive program which is not part of the hospital system.

What I would like to see is an approach whereby that would be brought under a general board or a general advisory council on the community health services so that we could integrate that whole system, and integrate it not just in terms of administration, but in terms of the whole concept. I think that's really going to be the key in terms of preventative health which everybody seems to admit is a growing need in our province nationally. I think that's going to be one of the ways of getting it started. We have some of those facilities there now.

I saw them when our daughter was born a year and a half ago, the extensive public health nursing system that is available. We can expand that, I think, and to great advantage. I mentioned those three areas, jobs, health and education, because I think those are the ones which are of major concern, certainly to me, but also to the people in general. I think they're things that we can really develop, if we do take a very innovative approach to solving those problems. I would say, Mr.

Speaker, that we have a particular opportune time to do that since, for example, we're talking next year, about 1985 being the International Year of the Youth. Now I think when you're talking about youth you're talking about the future, they're one and the same. I've spoken to a lot of young people in my constituency over the last few months. I've contacted all my high school graduates from last year to ask them what problems they were facing and what suggestions they had about solving those problems. I think I found some pretty interesting results.

People generally were concerned about their future, they were concerned about the lack of opportunities, lack of training and they expressed a real concern about their future. They also, in talking with them, expressed a certain amount of cynicism about the political process. This is something we, as legislators, have to address. We can sit here, as does the Member for Emerson, and call out, well let's call an elec tion, that's what his last 66 statement was.

I'm talking right now about young people who've never voted in an election and who've told me that they don't even know really where they stand with a political system. They see the Legislature or the Parliament, they hear the noise. In fact, one person said, all you ever hear is yelling and screaming and ringing bells, what is that going to accomplish? We have to address that I think. We have to look at what is a real crisis of confidence in our political system amongst young people today. There's no reason for that, there's no reason if we approach it properly.

You know I think the first place we have to start is by talking to the people who are affected the most themselves, talk to young people. You know I got a lot of comments back when I did contact my high school graduates. They said that nobody ever asked me before; I was really surprised. A lot of people said, basically, we have our ideas, too, we want those ideas looked at. I can tell you, I got some excellent ideas back about ways of solving the problem with unemployment or structural problems, new ideas about education ..

These are from kids who just graduated from Grade 12, you know, they've got a lot of good ideas. I think the biggest problem we've faced in the past, with a lot of these things, is we just haven't talked with people most directly affected. Every political party that I've heard in the last year or two has talked about youth and the young and the whole bit. I've never really seen a concerted effort to talk to young people themselves about the problems they face, to talk about the future. That's what I would lik e to suggest for 19 85 International Year of the Youth.

I would like to see it focused on, not just young people but the future so that we can involve everybody because I can tell you I get as many comments about issues affecting young people from parents as from young people themselves. You know they maybe have a bit more familiarity with the system. Maybe they're not as cynical, I don't know what it is but I've had as many parents come to me and say, I'm concerned about lack of educational access, or the situation with unemployment, as I have had young people.

So I would like to suggest today that we talk about that next year or maybe have a theme, such as, Manitoba in the year 2000, focus discussion amongst young people and also the general population about where we're going. Mr. Speaker, I think this has got to be the bottom line of where

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-3-4a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 3rd hansardpdf 4a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ae80294883e1b35497d9b8e78ad92c1cbb019bde

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