Manitoba Hansard — 15 June 1994 (Sitting 48, 35th Legislature, 5th Session)

35-5-48

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session • Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (Hansard) Published under the authority of The BoiUJurtlble Denis C. Rocan Sp«<ker Vol. XLIII No. 48 • 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, June 15, .1994

--- NAME ASHfON, Steve BARRE'IT, Becky CARSTAIRS, Sharon CERnLI, Marianne CHOMIAK. Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUAY, Loui�e DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNST, fun, Hon. EVANS,Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FD...MON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon.

FRIESEN, Jean MANITOBA LEGISLATIV E ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Aftlliation CONSTITUENCY Thompson Wellington River Heights Radisson Kildonan Ste.Ro�e Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkilk Concordia AI1hur- Virden Steinbach Riel GAUDRY,Neil GHLES HAMMER, Harold, Hon. GRAY, Avis St. James I..akeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wol�eley SLBoniface Minned osa Crescentwood Gimli HBL WER, Edward R. IUCKES, George KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LA1HLIN, Oscar LAURENDBAU, Mlm:el MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWAY,fun MANNES S, Clayton, Hon.

MARTIND ALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCORMICK, Nouna McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCHELSON, BollDie, Hon. ORCHARD, Donald, Hon. PALLISTER. Brian PENNER, Jack PLOHMAN , John PRAZNIK. Dauren, Hon. REID , Daryl RBIMBR, Jack RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANI'OS, Conrad SCHELLENB ERG, Harry STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STORIE , Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODREY, RoiCIIlary, Hon.

WOWCHUK,R osann Point Douglas The Maples Inkster The Pas SLNorbert SL Johns Elmwood Morris Buuow s Sturgeon Creek Osborne Brandon West Assiniboia River East Pembina Portage la Prairie Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonn et Transcona Niakwa SL Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Rossmere Kirkfield Parle FlinFlon La Verendrye Fort Garry Swan River PARTY. NDP NDP Libeial NDP NDP PC PC PC NDP NDP PC PC PC Libeial PC PC NDP NDP PC PC NDP Libeml PC Libeial PC NDP Libeial Libeial NDP PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC Libeial PC PC PC PC PC PC NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC NDP NDP PC NDP PC PC NDP

3566 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, June 15, 1994 The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS MATTER OF PRnnL EGE Minister's Comments Ms. Mari anne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon on a matt er of privilege . Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by clarifying why I am raising this matter today and not yesterday, because it did occur on Monday. The first reason is that we were in Estimates on Monday unti1 12:30, and I did not have an opp ortunity for a number of activities I thought were important to do before I brought this matter to the House. I needed to discuss it with my caucus.

I wanted to dis cuss it with the Hansard staff . I wanted to discuss it with the member for Osborne (Ms. McCormick), and I wanted to try and discuss it with other committee member s at the committee of Environment Estimates on Monday. The matter is of serious consequence to all members of the House and particularly the women of this Chamber. It involves the Minister ofFnergy and Mines (Mr. Orchard) and comments that he made to me during the committee. He said, you need a slap, and he said that also with the phrase, you need to go to the woodshe d. Mr.

Speaker, I have been in this House for almost four years, and I have endured name calling, personal attacks, obscene gestures and members opposite saying things like I have no business being an MLA. They may attack my ideas, they may attack policies that I recommend, but I will not tolerate references to violence or threats of violence against me. They have gone way over the line. There are other women on this side of the House who have also had threats made to them in tenns of gestures or names, and we will not be silenced, which I believe is one of the intentions of these kinds of thre ats.

We are here to exercise our free dom of spee ch, and the pin that I am wearing today from the 1919 strike says: Ideas cannot be confined by bars. Mr. Speaker, it was not long ago that women could not vote. It was not long ago that women could not go to university or own pr operty, but all of these things have changed. It was not long ago that we could not run for office, but now we can, and here we are. We are here to work as equals .

We will work to change economic policies, education policies, health, environment or any other policies which threaten women or violate women in any way and threaten their status or put them in an inferior or unequal status. The comment, you need a slap, exemp lifies sexism and agei sm that women have suf fered for a millenn ium. The violence against women in our society crosses all sectors. It is both systemic and system atic. I do not know if the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Orchard) has targeted me because I am female or also because I am young.

I do not know if he has particular problems with the ideas or the things that I say, but I fe el that he has targeted me with certain names in the House , as well. I think, Mr. Speaker, that I stand here on behalf of women who want to start to use power in a different way. We do not want to use positions of power to dominate, to intimidate, to violate or to manipulate people. This , in essence, I believe, is what is the issue here. I think that violence is about abusing power and trying to exert control over others through force and domination, and it is usually preceded by threats of violence.

These threats must be stopped. In any other workplace, this comment would be sexual harassment worthy of disciplinary action, if

3567 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 not legal action. Surely this Legi slature should be leading the way as a safe place for all. I know that many women across the province have their ability to perfoim their jobs affected negatively by sexual harassment and by violence in their workp lace, and that is why this is a matter of privilege . A matter of privilege must relat e to impediments for a member to perf oim their duties and must be so fund amental that it affects the dignity of all members of the House. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to consider this matter of privilege in the appropriate manne r.

Thank you very much. I move, seconded by the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindal e), that this matter of privilege be re ferred to the Committee of Privileges and Elections. • (13 35) Bon. Clayton Manness (Acting Government House Leader) : Mr. Speaker, as we know, this is a very, very serious motion brought fo rward by the member.

Although I was not here to hear all of her intervention, I would indicate that when members come fo rward and make certain allegations with respect to events that may or may not have happe ned at some po int in time , that obviously we are wise to first of all ref er to Hansard of that evening to fully determine what the record says. I have not had that opp ortunity , but I would sense that Hansard makes no reference to this particular exchan ge that may or may not have occurred that night. So, Mr.

Speaker, without being able to ascertain the validity of the allegations brought forw ard by the member, I would suggest that the motion is not in order, because as you are keenly aware, many comments are made from time to time from member to member. As a matter of fact, it is the very essence of the society that we are in, and certainly that happens at committee all the time. I find it, though, unf ortunate that the member would rise today and try, for whatever reason, to paint a picture that obviously has no evidence of fac t surrounding it. On that basis, Mr.

Speaker, I would ask you not to countenance the motion that has been put fo rward by the member. Bon. Don ald Orchard (Minister of Energy and Mine s): Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to this motion which bas-I did not catch the first part of my honourable friend 's presentation to the House and background to the House-but I assume it has to deal with consideration of Estimates Monday evening. The one thing I did hear my honourable friend say is she tried to attribute certain comments to me which involved the word "slap," is what I heard her say today.

I wa nt to tell my honou rable fr iend that I unequivocally, without reservation and without any hesitation, deny the use of any such language and, Mr. Speaker, I will identif y exactly the circumstances for your benefit and for the benefit of the House of the circumstances that eveni ng. I walked into that committee . I asked a col league, how is the member for Radisson doing? The answ er was, very quiet this evening, to which I used a phra seology which the Leader of the Opp osition (Mr.

Doer) has often used in jest across the floor, be cause the Leader of the New Dem ocratic Party has often refeired to members on this side of the House as having gone to the woodshed, a comment that often my friends opposite have he ard th e Lea der of the New Dem ocratic Party use, meaning that from time to time, when a member steps out of line according to certain circumstances of the party's policy, et cetera, that they may have been taken to the woodshed for discipline pmposes, so they do not make in app ropriate statements . My reply to the response that the member for Radisson (Ms.

Cerilli) was very quiet tonight was that she must have been taken to the woodshed, a reply that my honourable friend the Leader of the New Democratic Party has often used. I said that, Sir, and nothing more. I would never make a reference to any honourable member inside this House or any member of women in Manitoba that they deserve a slap, as has been accused by the member fo r Radisson. That is totally not the kind of language that I use or I condone, and I regret

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3568 that my honourable friend would make such an inappropriate and false accusation of myself. I would ask you to rule this matter of privilege , not only out of order, but frivolous . • (13 40) Ms. Norma McCorm ick (Osbor ne) : Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak as an observer of this incident and in support of my colleague from Radisson. I, too, observed the incident and heard the ph rase , taking to the woodshed.

What the member is saying is cotrect, that this is a common phrase in this House and there is, or at least up until this time, has been no indication of what measure would foll ow, wh ether a stem talking to or whatever. However, fo llowing the phr ase, taking to the woodshed, in this instance was the phras e, you need a slap . At the time, the member for Radisson and I exchanged glances of, I wou ld say, amazement at wh at we had heard and, subsequently, in a conversation, I urge d her to go back to Hansard to obtain the tape.

I do respect the rules of this House, and I do want to remind members that in my opening address following the Spee ch from the Throne, I spent about half of my time talking about the importance of members ' respect for one another, about our role in terms of setting a standard for Mani toba. " We have had a great deal of discussion in this House about the consequence of violence, violence of people to one another, youth violence , violence in marital relationships. If we are going to make any meaningful change , we have to set the standatd .

I would urge members to give serious consideration to this member's matter of privilege and to support it. Thank you. Mr. Doug Martindale (Deputy Opposition House Leader) : Mr. Speaker, as the deputy House leader for my caucus, I would like to support the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) in her matter of privilege.

Ver y brie fly, I wou ld like to refe r you to Beauchesne 25, and I would like to quote just one sentence: "In my view, parli amentary pri vilege does not go much beyond the right of free spee ch in the House of Commons and the right of a Member to discharge his duties in the House as a Member of the House of Commons." This was recorded in debates in 19 71. I think today we would say his or her rights and privileges as a member.

What the member for Radisson is saying is that wh en member s opposite use language that is threatening or sexually harassin g, that it inhibits her ability to do her job in this Chamber and in Estimates and to carry out all of her roles and functions as a member of this Legislature. I hope, Mr. Speaker, when you take this under advisement, that you will come back with a very generous ruling that looks at this in the broadest dime nsions of how we as members carry out our jobs, and I hope that you will rule appro priately. I would like to thank the member for Osborne (Ms.

McCormick) fo r her intervention in this matter, as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank all honourable members for their advice on this matter. I will peruse Hansard and I will come back to the House with a ruling on this matter. • (13 45) RO�PROCEEDINGS TAB LING OF REPORTS Bon. Eric Stef anson (Minister of Finance): Mr. Spe ake r, I am pleased to table the 19 94-95 Departmental Expenditure Estimates for the Department of Finance. Bon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Developmen t): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for the Manitoba Municipal Employees Benefi ts Board. Bon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister responsible for the Status of Women) : Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table today the Supplement ary Inform ation of the department for the Status of Women.

3569 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITT EES Standing Committee on Municipal Aff airs Mr. Speaker: Is there leave to revert to Presenting Reports by Sta nding and Special Committees? [agreed] Mr. Jack Penn er (Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Municipal Aff airs): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the First Report of the Committee on Municipal Affairs. Mr. Speaker: Dispense. Your Standing Comminee on Municipal Affairs presents the following as its First Report.

Your comminee met on Tuesday, June 14, 1994, at 10 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building to consider the annual report of The Forks Renewal Corporation for the year ended March 31, 1993, and The Forks Renewal Corporation financial statements for the year ended March 31, 1993 and auditor's report. At the June 14, 1994, meeting, your comminee elected Mr. Penner as chairperson. Mr. G. Campbell MacLean, chairperson, Mr. Nick Diakiw, president and CEO, Mr. AI Baronas, vi ce-preside nt, Ms. Ma ril yn Wi lliams, communications manager, Mr. Sid Kroker, site archeol ogist of The Forks Renewal Corporation and Mr.

Del Crewson of Deloitte and To uche provided such information as was requested with respect to the annual report, the fi nancial statements and auditor's report and the business of The Forks Renewal Corporation. Your committee reports that it has considered the annual report of The Forks Renewal Corporation for the year ended March 31, 1993, and The Forks Renewal Corporation financial statements for the year ended March 31, 1993, and auditor's report. Mr. Penner: I move, seconded by the honourable member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson), that the report of the committee be now received.

Motion agreed to. • (13 50) INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Bill 25-The Statute Law Amendment (Taxa tion) Act, 1994 Bon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that leave be given to introduce Bill25, The Statute Law Amendment (Taxation) Act, 19 94 (Loi de 19 94 modifiant diverses dispositions l�gislatives en mati�re de fiscali�). and that the same be now received and read a first time. His Honour the Lieutenan t-Governor, having been advised of the contents of this bill, recommends it to the House, and I would like to table the message.

Motion agreed to. Bill 205-The Chlld and Faml ly Services Amendment Act Mr. Doug Martindale (Burr ows) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Radisson (Ms. Ce rilli), that leave be given to introduce Bill 205, The Oilld and Family Services Amendment Act; Loi mod ifiant Ia

Loi sur les services h I' enfant et h Ia famill e, and that the same be now received and read a first time . Motion prese nted. Mr. Martindale: Mr. Speaker, the putport of my bill is to do what this government refuses to do, and that is to amend The Child and Family Services Act so that the Chil dren's Advocate reports to the Legislative Assembly rather than to the minister. This would parall el The Ombudsman Act whereby the Ombudsman reports to the Legislature rather than to any minister of cab inet.

We believe this is necessary as we saw in the last session when the Childr en 's Advocate made recommendations to the minister, but the community had no way of knowing what those recommendations were . We believe that this amendment would correct that probl em. Motion agreed to. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker : Prior to Oral Questions , may I direct the atte ntion of honourable members to the ..

June 15, 199 4 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3570 gallery , where we have with us this afternoon from the Holmfie1d Col ony School forty Grades 1 to 8 students under the direction of Mr. Lyons. This school is lo cated in the co nstituency of the hon ourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Rose). From the Lord Selkirk Schoo l, we have twenty five Grades 4 and 5 students under the direction of Mrs. Marcella Turnbull. This school is lo cated in the constituency of the ho nourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Malowa y). On behalf of all hon ourable members, I wo uld like to welcome you here this aftern oon.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Burns Commit tee Reco mmendations Public Consultations Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition) : My question is to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, on May 2, I was asking a number of questions to the Premier dealing with the Jets agreement that be had entered int o in November of 19 91. At the time, we were asking the Premier about the rep ort of the Bums co mmittee and whether be had met with members of the Bums committee .

He said on that date: I met as recently as last week with severa l memb ers of the Burns co mmittee to share their observa tions, perha ps their apologies and frustrations at not being able to finish the final report in accorda nce with the ori ginally set target date. During these discussi ons , they co uld on ly give us the indi cations of what outstanding matters there were . Mr. Speaker, the Burns report was ori ginally sc heduled to report in the spring.

It is now to report two weeks tomo rrow, at the end of June. 1bere are a number of majo r con cerns across the province dealing with the pro je cted lo sses that the government was aware of in November of 1991. I wo uld like to ask the Premier: Has he been briefed again by any members of the Bums committee , and can the Premier advise us of how • the public will participate in this debate about the losses of the ho ckey team and the options available to the public dealing with the future of the Jets? Bon. Gary Filmon (Pre mier) : Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I have had subsequent briefing in the meeting with members of the Burns committee , and the public is participating at the present time through a whole series of ways by which the issue is being debated publicly here in this Legislature, on ope n-line talk: shows, at public fora that have been organized by many diff erent organi zations. Mr.

Doer: It was not until the opp osition was able to go to the Public Accounts commi ttee and have the Pro vincial Auditor obtain the briefing mat erial that was available to cabinet and caucus of the government but not the public or the media in November of 1991 that we have full and a ccura te pro jections from the government, as they had them in November of 1991. •

(1355) Publi c Accounts Committee Winni peg Jets Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition) : I wo uld like to ask the Premier, to ensure that we do not go through another last-minute deal where the public is not informed of the facts of the po tential losses and the pro jections that the government may have at their disposal, wo uld the Premier agree today that any dealings with the Bums com mittee will be referred to the Public Accounts committee before the provincial Premier or the cabinet makes any decisions on the future of the Jets and the proje cted losses for the public?

Will we have the same kind of information that we just obtained last week from the Public Accounts co mmittee available befo re we make a decision in the future? Bon. Gary Filmon (Premier) : Mr. Speaker, at the time that the decision was made, it was known publicl y that there was the probability of losses that wo uld occur from the agreement that was entered into to keep the Jets in Winnipeg until such time as a final decision could be made with respect to the construction of a new facility. 1be decision was made , Mr. Speaker, knowing two things, one, that the pro jected losses were

3571 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 ap proximately half of the direct revenues to government during the period of time in which that agree ment would exist, that in addition to the fact that governments got back in direct taxation revenues more than twice as much as the estimated losses they would encounter, there would be employment levels of something in the range of a thousand to 1, 400 people , and that the team would continue to play in Wmnipeg and result in some $50 million of overall economic benefit to the community while they played in Winni peg in accordance with that agreement.

Those were the considerations that were made, that were debated publicly and were the reasons that that agree ment was entered into. I might indicate, as well, Mr. Speaker, that at the time, the Leader of the Opposi tion did not raise any serious concerns, did not express any major opposition to the deal, and, in fac t, went on record as saying he did not want to make this a political issue. Of course, we know what desperate straits he is in politically, and we unde rstand exactly why he is going back on all of the things he said before . That is fair enough.

He is entitled to do all of those things in the desperate circumstances in which he finds himself. Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the only person who has made this a political issue is the Premier who negotiated a deal and withhe ld it from the public. The Premier withhe ld this from the public until we could get the Provincial Auditor to reveal the numbers that cabinet had in November of 1991, the $43.5 million that was bef ore cabinet in November of 1991 when this government agreed to this agreement. Mr.

Speaker, all I ask the Premier to do is to guarantee this Legislature that any new agree ment will come to the Public Accounts committee , so we can have the Provincial Auditor available to look at the numbers that the government may or may not release to the public.

All I am asking the government to do is have these numbers go before the Public Accounts committee and these options go before the Public Accounts committee, a positive alternative to not having the public aware of the fu ll implications of any kind of future arran gement All I am asking the Premier today is to give this Legislature the assurance that the Provincial Auditor and the Public Accounts committee will be involved in any future decision of the Jets, because all of us are responsible for pro jected losses, and pro jected losses are the responsiblity of the public.

That is a very simple request to the Premier. •

(1400) Mr. Fil mon: Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition is saying that he would not enter into an agreement which resulted in the taxpayer getting back more than $2 for every dollar that was put at risk, direct taxation revenue , if he would not enter into that agree ment that is fine, he can say so. He is entitled to go to the public and say that he would rather have had the Jets team not here; he would rather have not had the taxation reven ue; he would rather not have had the thousand jobs; he would rather have not had all of those things. That is his entitlement. We will acce pt that from him.

We know exactly what he wants to do, and that is to simply make some cheap politics based on it. We would like to pursue things in the best interests of the people of Manitoba and ensure that the people of Manitoba are put in a position where their interests are protected, and the tax revenues that we get and the employment that we get from having the team here are protected. That is our objective and we will continue to pursue it. Waste Reduction Program Volunteer Organizations Ms. Marianne Ce rilli (Radiss on): Mr.

Speaker, one of the biggest issues related to environment in North America is overconsumption and waste . There have been two signif icant documents rele ased lately that deal with this . One is the government 's bill on waste reduction and the second is the National Sewage Report Card by the Sierra Legal Defence Fund. My questions for the Minister of Environment are based on these two. I would like to ask the minister how the Waste Reduction and Recycling program is going to

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3572 compensate programs like the Fort Whyte Centre Recycling Pro gram which benefits financially from a volunteer program that will no longer, I believe, be possible with the new program that the govemment is bringing forw ud. Bon. Glen Cum min gs (Mini ster of Environ ment): Mr. Speaker, the member bas it totally backwards.

In fact, volunteer organizations, and particularly an organization like Fort Whyte, if we now attach value through this program to collect recyclab les, then rather than just the value that is being brought from the material through the marketplace that they are receiving today being their source of revenue, but also, well in excess of several hundred dollars could be accumulated on the amount of money they collect monthly over there. Certainly, this is meant to enhance those types of programs, as well as enhance the household curbside capabilities .

It will still depend on those who are supporters of Fort Whyte to bring their recyclables there , but the recyclables will be worth far more than they are today. So the member bas it totally backwards. Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Spe aker, perhaps the minister needs to make that clarifica tion to the volunteers in the Fort Whyte Program who are calling me with these concerns. Transition Period Ms.

Marianne Cerilli (Radi sso n): Given that the transition and the scope of the government 's program is a concern, bow will programs like the Fort Whyte Centre and the various curbside programs in the province be involved in the transition to ensure that they are going to have the ir ideas and their concerns addressed in this program? Bon. Glen Cu mmings (Min ister of Envir onmen t): Mr. Speaker, we announced the amendments to the WRAP legislation that will give us the legislative capability of imposing predisposal levies.

We will then be introducing regul atoty proposals under the tenets of that act to attach that money to the cost of removing those recyclables from the waste stream. Mr. Speaker, the intent is that there will be an implementation committee established within the next few days. There will, in fa ct, be an adv isoty committee as recommended under The WRAP Act, where the public and interested parties with the Recycling Council of Manitoba, for example , will be invited to participate and provide advice . Mr. Speaker, we have been working for a number of years on The WRAP Act and on proposals of this nature.

We have just spent a year of very intensive negotiations and public discussion under the CIPSI proposal for a voluntaty multimaterial recycling program, and this program ve ty much fo llows the principles that were involved there in terms of the types of materials and the fact that the industry would pay for the cost of the colle ction, and the value of the product would be enhanced. I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that this will be a vety well received and vety app ropriate program for the province of Manitoba. Sewage Treatmen t Ms. Marianne Ce rilli (Radisso n): Mr.

Speaker, given that the report I referenced earlier, the National Sewage Report Card, says that sewage is not just made up of human excrement and water, it contains over 200 chemicals and other toxins which enter the system from househol ds, business and indu strial operations and includes debris such as grit, gravel, tam pons, condoms, rags and hair , and this is a particular concern in W'mnipeg under the report, I want to ask the minister, what will the government 's program on waste reduction and recycling do to ensure that the rivers, as indicated in this report in Winnipe g, are no longer used as a garbage dump?

Bon. Glen Cummings (Mini ster of Enviro nment): Well, Mr. Speaker, I am not sure bow the member is able to make the leap of faith with what is a very positive and proactive appr oach that we are implementing in tenns of collection of recyclables in this province. I imagine she is a little wonied about bow valuable and bow important the public is going to see this program, because it is innovative. It is going to be a leading test in North America for bow a

3573 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 19 94 jmisdiction can clean up a broad array of materials , not just run a very narrow- scoped recycling program. I think the member knows full well that when she looks though this report, they have ignored the fact that Brandon is entering into a $31 -million sewage treatment upgrade . The City of Winnipeg is in the process of what will ultimately cost them $25 million for the immediate licensing and upgrade of their facil ities.

They are in the process of responding immediately to the number of surveys and tests we have put fo rwaro. [in terjection] Well, the member for Dauphin (Mr. Plobman) wants to talk about a report card. In 19 87, this provin� Mr. Speaker: Order, pl ease. I would remind the honourable minister to deal with the matter raised. Burns Commi ttee Recommen dations Publi c Consultations Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Oppositi on) : Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. I was veey interested to bear the Premier say in response to the Lead er of the Opp osition 's (Mr.

Doer) question just a few minutes ago that be does not disa gree with the need for a public debate prior to his government considering and making a decision on the options which are, one hope s, go ing to eventu ally come fr om the Burns committee with respect to the Winnipe g Jets. What be did, however, was indi cate that this public debate, in his view, bas been served through debate in this Legislature and in other public forums like open-line radio shows.

Can the Premier give a commitment today because we do not know when that Bums committee report is going to come down, that there will , in fact, be opportunity whenever it comes down, if this House is in session, through a meeting in the Public Accounts committee or one of the legislative committees, and if the House is not in session at the time it comes down, through another public fo rum which brings together membeiS of the Legislature and membeiS of the public through a public bearing process or whatever process the minister sees fit-to examine in a veey public way the options that are put before this prov ince?

Can the First Minister spell out his commitment to embmk upon that public process before a final decision is made, whenever this report comes out? Bon. Gary Fi lmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, every day that we meet in this Legislature, there is an opportunity for membeiS opposite to take a position, express their views and debate the issues of the W innipeg Jets . To this point, the only thing we have beaid from the Leader of the Oppos ition (Mr.

Doer) is that be is op posed to getting two dollars back for eveey dollar that is put out, two dollan in direct taxe s back to three levels of government, back for every dollar that is put at risk in tenns of an agree ment to keep the Jets here in Manitoba. All we have beaid from him is that be is opposed to that kind of arrangement and agreement, and the Leader of the Liberal Party bas said similarly. Mr. Speaker, they will have the opportunity to make their views known when the Bums report is made public. We have no interest in sitting on that issue.

As soon as it is available to us, it will be pub lic, and it will be the sub ject of, I am sure, very intensive debate , not only here but throughout all of the avenues of public opi nion. All be needs to do is tune in on the open-line talk shows all day long and find that the public is expressing their views. All be needs to do is go and meet with the public in any forum and state a position, and the public will be out there discussing it with him. I have been out at public events . I have been out at blllbe cues.

I have been out at public meetings and gatherings, and the public is talking about it, and they will talk about iL That opportunity will certainly be there for him to be involved in the debate . Mr. Edwards: Firstly, the Fust Minister can give no assuran ce to this House as to when we might actually get that report Secondly, Mr. Speaker, be is now app arently content to have that public debate occur through the media.

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3574 If he really means what he says, if he wants to have that thorough public review and ensure that he has the benefit of that ad vice, he should stand up today and commit to a process of public review , because if we are not in this Hou se--and we do not know when that report is coming down so he cann ot speculate that we will or will not be-what will the public review process be, where the public will have an opportunity to speak: not on some sort of ad hoc basis on open-line shows, but in a fo nnal process which respects the right of all citizens to have a chance to come fo rward and express their views?

Mr. Filmoo : Mr. Speaker, I can assure him we will be in this House. Mr. Edwards: If, in fa ct, the Premier is convinced, as he obviously is, that we will be in this House , when will we receive this report? Has he, in fact, received a copy of it or a draft version today at this point? Mr. Filmon : Mr. Speaker, I have received no copy of the report . The fact of the matter is I have committed that as soon as we receive it, it will be made public and will be the sub ject of debate and dis cussi on here in this House, I am certain . • (1410 ) Family Services-Westman Region Employee Transfers Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. The government has ordered the transfer of two staff in the Department of Family Services from Brandon to a small town 90 miles away in the constituency of the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) for no apparent reason. I unde rstand that one vocational rehabilitation counsellor and one daycare co-onlinator are being transferred as of September 1, which will increase travel costs and overtime costs because they are being removed from the concentration of their caseloads .

Can the Premier explain to this House why this move is being fo rced on the regi onal staff in We stman and eroding the service delivery of the department in that area? Bon. Gary Fil mon (Premier) : Mr. Speaker, I know the New Democratic Party is opposed to decentr alization of gover nment services throughout rural Manitoba. I take that as a given from the New Democratic Party. Mr. Speaker, I can tell him this. We will not be doing things that will erode pub lic services, and we will not be doing things that will be detrimental to the interests of good government in this pro vince. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr.

Speaker, would the Premier confirm that a supervisor, Mr. Duncan Pringle , a long-time and highly regarded civil servant, has resigned on principle because he was forced to reassign two staff against his professional judgment to the Roblin-Rossell constituency to accommodate the political ob jectives of this government? Mr. Fi lmon : Mr. Speaker, I re ject totally his allegations and accusati ons. I cannot in any way conf irm what he is saying. If he has that inf onnation, he should make it public, and we will certainly have that issue dealt with. Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr.

Speaker, I trust the Pr emier will be looking into this and do the analysis. My final question to the Premier is, why would his government undennine the excelle nt program for ha ndicapped peo ple off ered by Career Opportuni ties, formerly known as A.R .M. Industries, by reducing the voca tional rehabilitation service to this organization which will result from this particular transfer from Brandon to another town? Mr. Filmon : Mr. Speaker, without accepting any of the

preamble of the question, I will take that as notice on behal f of the Minister of Family Services (Mrs . Mitchelson). CN Raii!CP Rall Merger T ransc ona Main Shop Mr. Daryl Reid (Trans cona) : Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I raised the matter of the Canadian National Railway Strategic Communications Plan, wherein they were attempting to limit public debate on the proposed merger between CN and CP Rail and, in fact, have targeted various groups,

3575 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 including government officials and the media in their eff orts. Since that time , we have now learned that the president and CEO of CN Rail has indicated that the company is now looking at merging its Transc ona main shop operations with the CP Rail Calguy operations . Si nce the Minister of Highways and Transportation has recently met with CN officials, was the minister inf ormed that CN is now looking at merging its Transcona main shop operations with the Calguy operations? Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportatio n): Mr.

Speaker, I have met with CN officials; I have met with CP officials. In both cases, we have talked about the realities the railroad indu st ry is fa cing. Certain ly, both railroads are downsizing in tenns of the realities they are facing. They have assmed me that in the process of that, Winn ipeg and Manitoba will not be neg atively impacted in a comparative sense to other parts of the country.

The memb er full well knows that any discussions in terms of the bigger question of merger of those two companies , as he raised yesteiday, is subject to the bureau of competition, National Transportation Agency and significant public hearings, but I can tell the member the gist of my discussi ons at this time is we will not be negatively impacted relative to the other districts and regions of this province or of this country. Mr. Reid: Mr. Speak er, obviously , the minister is not aware of the comm ents from the president and CEO of CN Rail who says that is going to- Mr. Speaker: Question, please. Mr.

Reid : What steps is this Minister of Highways and Transportation prepared to take to ensme that Manitoba does not lose further several thousand railway jobs by any merger, or is he only going to listen to the railways and the shippers, as he has only done in the past week? Mr. Findlay : Mr. Speaker, I do not think the member really realizes the favourable position we are in in Manitoba with regard to railroad jobs. We have 4 percent of the population of the country and 12.5 percent of the railroad jobs in this country. I think that is a very favourable position to be in. Mr. Reid: It is obvious , Mr.

Speak er, this minister wants to cut the jobs down to 4 percent. Public Consult ations Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcon a): Mr. Spea ker, since on June 9, the government hired a private consultant who held meetings with only shippers to discuss the merger of CN and CP Rail operations, why did the government not open these meetings to the general public and to railway employees who stand to be the most severely impacted parties by any merger between CN and CP Rail? Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportatio n): Mr.

Speaker, last week , there was a public meeting here in Manitoba in National Transportation Week which that member did not attend, and I was asked the question, is the meeting that he is referring to open to the public? The answer was yes. It was open to the public. Point of Order Mr. Reid: Mr. Speak er, on a point of order, the Minister of Highways and Transportation made reference to the fact that I had not attended the National Transportation W eek meetings that were held in WlDDipeg. First, I was never notified- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order.

That is clearly a dispute over the facts. Transportation Subsidy Elimination Impact on Manitoba Mr. Eric Robinson (Ruperts land) : Mr. Spea ker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Transportation. This past week in both Thunder Bay and also in Toron to, the federal minister, Doug Young, again reiterated his desire to e liminate subsidies, direct and indirect, to maintain existing rail, highway and air transport syste ms.

Given that in speec hes he has said subsidies for western grain farmers and VIA Rail, in particular, are to be cut-and particularly the concern we have is its impact in Manitoba and also on the

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3576 bayline-I want to ask the minister what details he has heard from the minister on these cuts. Bon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation) : Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member has raised that question, that the members over there now realize what is going on. It is a very serious situation. Mr. Young made some comments in Thunder Bay on June 3. You can read between the lines , and maybe some big decisions were at hand with that government.

In Ottawa on June 8, some comments were made again, and the Liberal Party in this Legislature, in the emergency debate , tended to condone what was said and said he did not really mean what he was saying. In Toronto on June 13, the minister was very clear. 1be member is right. That federal Minister of Transport is making statements about removing sub sidies right across the board in so many dif fe rent areas, not only in Manitoba but across Canada. He is doing it, and the member asked me if we bad any prior knowledge. No, we did not have any prior knowledge.

He has done it without any consultation with provincial governments across this country, without any consultation with the industry that I am aw are of . He doe s not demonstrate any plan of action. He is just wal.k:ing away from long-time supports to the transportation industry of this country without any discussi on, without any plan. If that is the Liberal agenda, I am astounded with it. The member full well knows we sent a very strong letter to that federal minister not accepting anything of what he said; in fact, showing to him how he is being irre sponsible in that position. • (14 20) Mr. Robinson : Mr.

Speaker, I and all of us on this side of the House find it surprising that the federal minister would keep on giving off-the -reco rd speeches to 750 delegates but not to provincial governme nts. What efforts is this minister making to defend the interests of Manitoba? I would hope that he would not be waiting for a final announcement on cuts. Mr. Findlay: We ll, Mr. Speaker, the member knows the letter we sent That was certainly a very strong response. We participated in an emergency debate here.

But, further to that, I wa nt the members of this House to know the way we are being treated by that federal Minister of Transport. Since I have been minister, since last September, we have sent him 13 letters and received four re sponses. The letter we sent last week has not even been acknowledged at this point, let alone been responded to. So that is the kind of communication and consultation that that federal Liberal government is carrying on with the provinces of this country. Mr.

Robinson : My final question is, will this government contact the other western Canadian governments in order to present a co-ordina ted strategy to de fend the interests of west ern Canadian producers? Also, will this government e nsure that the issue of eliminating transportation subsidies takes a prominent place on the agenda of the meeting of agricultural ministers taking place here in July? Also, will this minister table any infonnation on these matters when he receives it, in view of the importance of these issues to this province? Mr.

Findlay: The Premiers of the four western provinces and two teuitories met in Gim1i just a couple of weeks ago. They asked the ministers of transport to get together to fonn Team West to deal with transp ortation issues related to western Canada. Obviously, it was very, very important that the Premiers, and our Premier (Mr. Filmon), in particular, took that leaders hip. We are positioned to do that. He has asked me to lead that process , and we will . This is very significant on our agenda, and we expect and hope that Mr. Young will show up at the Council of Ministers meeting at the beginning of July.

We do not have confirmation yet, but it is very impera tive he does, so as a group in western Canada, we can address these issues in front of him.

3577 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 Sewage Treatment Gove rnmen t Initiatives Ms. Norma McCorm ick (Os borne) : Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Environment. The National Sewage Report Card , giving Winni peg its C-minus grade, identifies problems with our sewage syst em with respect to the absence of anything other than secondary sewage treatment, no disinfection, combined sanitary and storm sewers which overflow regularly. Has the Minister of Urba n Affairs (Mrs.

Mcintosh) or the Minister of Environm ent met with the city to seek solutions to this continuing and emb arrassing situation? Bon. Glen Cu mmin gs (Minister of Enviro nment): Mr. Speak er, there is probably not any one issue that bas consum ed more time in the minist er's office through the Urban Affairs Committee of Cabinet, through the Manitoba Department of Environment and City of Winnipeg worldng groups to deal with the long-standing and ongoing problems of sewage treatment in this city.

I find it, however, ironic that those who wrote this report point to WlDDipeg and give this city a C-minus, and at the same time, they ignore the fact, without making what I consider significant comparisons, that other cities are dumping theirs totally untreated. I fail to see the basis upon which some of these evaluations were made , because it would appear that the authors of this report appear to think that dilution is the solution to pollution. That is what they have accepted in some other jurisdictions, Mr. Speaker. Ms. McCormick: My second question is to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson).

Winnipeg sewage treatment plants were upgraded between 1990 and 1993 at a cost of $200 million. A significant amount of the infrastructure money is committed to sewer construction. My question to the minister is, will the sewer replacement projects correct the problem of having combined sanitary and storm sewers which result in 2.5 billion litres of untreated sewage spilling into our rivers? Mr. Cummin gs: Mr. Spea ker, I think the member bas bit on what is the most critical aspect of dealing with this problem . No one is denying that there needs to be action taken.

Where I take issue is whether or not there is, in fact, acknowledge ment of the expenditures and the initiatives that are being taken by this province and by the City of Win nipeg. There is about $15 million out of the infrastru cture program that will assist in reduction of the combined sewer outflows. Let us be perfectly clear, and I am sure the member knows this figure as well as I do, but the ultimate solution for the City of Winnipeg to stop any combined sewer outfalls will likely be about $1 billion, a problem of significant enormity that it will take some time to deal with.

I hope the member will acknowledge that there bas been a lot of money spent in the last fe w years by the City of Winnipeg and the province. Ms. McCormick: Mr. Speak er, my final question then to the Minister of Environment is, as technological advancement is being made all the time, what more can we do that is cost-beneficial or aff ordable in keeping with a commitment to sustainable development which considers not only the cost of doing it but the cost of not doing it? Mr. Cummin gs: Mr.

Speaker, the City of Wmnipeg, in con junction with the Department of Environment, is in the process of upgrading their licences for all of their sewage plants. One of the thin gs they have been asked to consider is other technologies other than simply chlorination to deal with the third level of treatment of their dis charges . Of course, historically, that bas meant more expense.

I believe , and others are beginning to advise me that perhaps we are now going to be able to access some additional more cost-ef ficient or at least more eff ective, if not in the same price range , methods of dealing with this disposal. While I am not a chemist who could explain it precisely, the fact is, that is one of the things that is taking a little bit of time in the city presenting its final plans to the province .

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3578 Sewage Treatment Government Initiatives Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speak er, my questions are for the Minis ter of Environment. As the minister knows and as has been suggested earlier on in Question Period, the se wage containin g fecal coliform bacteria has made the Red River downs trea m of Winni peg one of the most degraded and polluted water courses in all of western Canada. In fact, the amount of sewage discharged annually has been compared to the volume of approximately 60 Exxon Val dez oil spills .

My question directly is to the Minis ter of Environm ent. Is this minister now prepared to order the Oty of Wmnipeg to disinfect its waste? Bon . Glen Cumm ings (Min ister of Envir onment): Mr. Speak er, as I implied in my previous answ er, that is, in fac t, the direction that the licensing of the City of Winni peg plants is taking . Again, in the report that has been put together, I find it v�ry interesting that they are not making quantitative compiuisons.

When we look at the city of Montre al, the city of Vancouver, they are putting out billions of litres of untre ated sewage , not just when they have combined sewer outf alls when there is excess surface water drainage into their system, but on a regular basis. Mr. Speaker, this city, at least, has done everything it can to confine its combined sewage outf alls to only periods of high surface water runof f, and at lea st that is confined to an ide ntifiable solution, which is , frankly, another billi on dollars worth of investment. Mr. Dewar: Mr.

Speaker, my supplementary que stion is als o to the Minister of Environment. Would he be prepared to foll ow the Clean Env ironment Commission recommendation and develop a public warning system for high levels of fecal coliform for residen ts of Selkirk and other communities downstream? Mr. Cumm ings: Mr. Speaker, that recommendation was accepted in principle but has not been fully imple mented .

The fact is last year, it was not particularly advant ageous to get it in at the time that it should have been in, and, in fa ct, we are continuing to wolk towards meeting a reduction of the fe cal coliform at the same time as we deal with that other issue. • (1 430) Mr. Dewar: Mr. Speaker, my final ques tion is to the Minis ter of Environment. Would the minister consi der more frequent tests of the water as it flows through the Se lkirk community? Mr. Cummin gs: Mr.

Speak er, the testing regime, as it has been explained to me, is regular, but it is speeded up under situations where it would be cons idered of significant importance to know if there have been changes in the water quality . So if the member is asking for more data, if he is asking for more colle ction, I suggest to him that is already being considered using the regime that is in place in order to do more frequent testing if there seem ed to be some element of increase in the contamination at that site. Mr.

Speak er, the thing that hurts the reput ation of this province and this city more than anything else in this debate is in a country-wide rating, Manitoba rates better than any other provin ce in a percentage of total sewage treated. So it is most unfair and unreasonable to put it into this context in terms of the m easurem ent of the litres without looking at the total percentage of sewage treated in this prov ince. Pren diviDe Industries Cutting Rights Mr. Jerry Storie (Fiin Flo n): Mr.

Speak er, there has been a good deal of discussion over the last few months about this government's ability to negoti ate deals . In the 19 89 period, when the government was negotiating with Repap , we raised concerns about the additional wood-cut areas and the giving up of traditional use for groups and companies in the Repap cutting area. One of those was Prendiville Industries . For a number of months, includ ing a meeting in January of this year, Prendiville indu stries has been trying to get from the gov ernm ent assurance s

3579 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 of a wood supply for their post-operatiom both in Birch River and in Neepawa. My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources. Can the Minis ter of Natural Resources tell this House when the gover nment will guarantee Prendivill e industries the 6,000 cor ds, a small figure by any one 's stand ards, that they need to secure the 30 to 50 jobs that are part of the operations both in Birch River and Neepawa? When is that assurance going to be given? Bon. Albert Driedge r (Minister of Natural Resources) : Mr.

Spea ker, I assume that the company he is referring to is the company that was one of the biggest operators within the province years ago and ultimately sold a lot of their quota at a time when the price was high, and now, we have the problem of assess ing that kind of a prob lem. lbey sold a substantive amount of their quota at the time when the value of the quota was high. I will tell the member that we are reviewing that issue. Once we have done that , I will give him a reply . Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, the company has been told that the government has been reviewing this for many months.

The latest meeting resulted in a letter going back to the company which, according to one of the principals of the company, was woefully inadequate, not making any guarantee. Is the government concerned about the fact that between 30 and 50 jobs could be lost if this kind o f secure source of wood cann ot be fo und for the company? Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, when things go well and prices are high, all of a sudden, we hav e interest from all over the place, within th e prov ince , outside the province. Everybody wants to have wood allocatiom at this time .

The challenge that we are fa cing within my department and the fo restry department is to try and do an analysis to make sure that we have the best economic impact and job creation, and I am not taking the request lightly. I have other colleagues in this Legislature who have peopl e who have jobs at stake, as well. We are trying to deal with that issue, and we will be dealing with it very shortly. Mr. Speaker : Time for Oral Ques tions has expired. Speaker' s Ruling Matter of Privilege Discipline and Assignment of Judges Mr. Speaker: I have am ling for the House . Order, pl ease.

After Prayers on June 10, 1994, the honourable Minister of Justice (Mrs. V odrey) rose on a matt er of privilege respecting comments made on June 8 by the honourable member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) and mov ed that this ma tter be referred to the Commi ttee on Pri vileges and Electiom and that the member table his evidence or wi thdraw his cha rge unequivoca lly and apologize to this minister and this House. After receiving advice from the House , I took the matter under advisement. The honourable minister fu lfilled the fi rst condition of privilege by raising the matter at the first available opportu nity.

As to the second condition, that of establishing a prima facie case, I am ruling that this is not a matter of privilege . The basis of the minist er's complaint was a question add ressed to the Acting Minister of Justice on June 8, which was: "What role did the government play in effectively disciplining the only judge who has spoken up aga inst this backlog?" In her submiss ion on June 10, the minister did not identify any particular privilege which had allegedly been breache d. Also, the matter in question related to the minister's respomibilities as a minister, not as an MLA.

As I have noted in past rulings, for example on December 10, 19 92, privilege is concerned with special rights of members in their capacity as members in their parliamentary wolk, not in their capacity as ministers or party Leaders or whips. Theref ore , comments about the conduct of a minister in the performance of his or her ministerial duties do not fall within the field of Parliamentary privilege.

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3580 ORDERS OF THE DAY House Business Bon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader) : Mr. Speaker, would you call for second reading Bill 20, fo llowed by Bill 24. Following that, would you call for debate on second readings in this order: Bill 8, Bill 4, Bill 9, Bill 3, Bill 21. SECOND READINGS Bill 20- The Municipal Amen dment Act Bon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Devel opment): I move, seconded by the Minister of Highways and Transport ation (Mr. Fin dla y), that Bill 20, The Municipal Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur les municipal it6s), be now read a second time and be ref erred to a committee of this House. Motion pres ented. Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speak er, I am pleased today to present to you and all members of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba a bill, The Municipal Amend ment Act, that will allow the collection of arrears of taxes on oil and gas facilities within the province of Manitoba. The Depart ment of Rur al Development has worked very hard to fa cilitate the needs of all municipalities in Manitoba.

We have worked closely with the associations representing the municipalities and with individual municipaliti es. This legislati on permits municipalities to collect arrears of taxes on oil and gas faci lities from the purchasers of oil and gas produced in those fac il ities. This amendment has been requested by the Union of Manitoba Municipalities, The Manitoba Municipal Administrators Association and by a number of individual municipal ities in the southwest region of our prov ince.

The Department of Rural Development is well aware that this amendment is a high priority for the munici palities which have requested changes to this act. Without this amend ment, these municipa lities would continue to be required to take legal action to claim personal property tax arrears on oil and gas facilities. In addition, Mr. Speaker, my department has researched similar legi slation in other jurisdictions, for example , the province of Saskatchewan, to e nsure fairne ss and consistency in the approach that we are taking.

The Municipal Amendment Act, the colle ction of arrears on taxes on oil and gas facilitie s, is important to those municipal ities that are aff ected by this industry. These municip al ities are largely in the southwest comer of our province and include the R.M.s of Pipest one, Wal lace, Brenda, Arthur, Edward and Albert . In fact, the R.M. of Pipestone has sponsored resolutions at the last two annual meetings of the Union of Manitoba Mun icipalities association in fav our of legislative changes to this act.

Without this legislation, the R.Ms are greatly impacte d because they are not able to collect the tax arre ars. To give you some ide a of just how severe the impact can be, Mr. Speak er, the tax arrears in some of the older wellheads in the municipali ty, such as the R.M. of Wallace , can add up to as much as $100, 000 in a given year, which would represent about 10 percent of their revenue base. It is obvious that government must take action to support municipali ties in the collection of these arre ars.

It is the goal of the Department of Rur al Development to work in partnership with rural municipalities and mral Manitobans to provide service to all those we serve . Our department 's mandat e is to assist the communities and residents of mra1 areas and of this province to pursue their own prioriti es. In short, our goal is to help mral Mani tobans help themselves . With this le gislative change , Mr. Speak er, that is exactly what we are doing.

I seek the supp ort of all members of this Legislative Assembly to supp ort The Municipal Amendment Act, and that is, the collection of arrears on taxes on oil and gas facilities in our province. I am hopeful that with the support of the members of this House, this bill can receive spee dy pass age through the p roces s in the Chamber. Thank you very much.

3581 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 Mr. Clif Evaos (Interlake) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Selkirk: (Mr. Dewar}, that debate be adj ourned. Motion agreed to. BDI 24-Tbe Waste Reduction and Preven tio n Amendm ent Ad Hon. Glen Cu mmings (Minister of Environ ment): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mrs . Vodrey}, that Bi11 24, The Waste Reduction and Prevention Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia reduction du volume et de Ia production des d�chets, be now read a second time and be refened to a committee of this House. Motion presen ted. •

(1440) Mr. Cummi ngs: Mr. Speaker, I will take a couple of minutes to speak to this bill and because of the nature of the bDI and because this is a bill that is very much enabling and leads to all sorts of possibilities in terms of how we can reduce waste and excess packaging in this province, I will tiy and confine my remarks to specific aspects of the bill. The Waste Redu ction and Prevention Act has stood as a mo del for wa ste reduction and prevention legislation across this countiy since it was first enacted back in 1990.

We know that other jurisdictions have taken this bill, amended it to suit particular circumstances within their province and have brought fo rward legislation within their jurisdictions modeled on the basic framewolk that the original Waste Reduction and Prevention Act had been built upon. This act assigns stewardship responsibility to distributors of products or mat erials with a potential to become waste and that also allows for the development of regulations to encourage waste reduction and prevention programs in this provi nce. Mr.

Speaker, I think it is fair to say that the act itself is very much part of the-will be part and parcel of the regulations that are attached to it in terms of its ability to impact on waste reduction in our province . The underlying principle of distributor responsibility was adopted in the act fo llowing an extensive public consultation process undertaken by the Recycling Action Committee in 1989. This principle fo rms the basis of Manit oba's waste reduction and prevention strate gy, which is to achieve a 50 percent reduction of waste by the year 2000.

I would have to say that Manit oba, on a percentage basis comp ared to all other jurisdictions across this countiy, has achieved a greater volume of reduction of its waste than any other jurisdi ction. I think it is in no small part reflected by, first of all, the attitude of the people in this province and, secondly , by the fact that we now have this framewolk in place. The proposed amendments to the act will provide for greater flexibility in applying predisposal levies on designated products and mat erials and collecting the levies from manufacturers, distributors and retailers .

The amendments will also allow for a wide range of WRAP program management options, but Mr. Speaker, I should point out specifically that the intention is that the act would be exercised at the highest possible level in the waste production change , in other words, at distribution or manufacturer level. The proposed amendments to the act will provide for greater flexibility in applying predisposal levies on de signated products and mat erials and collecting the levies from manufacturers, distributors and retailers . These amendments allow for a wide range of WRAP program management options.

The proposed amendments are necessary to allow for the est ablishment of the Manitoba Product Stew ardship program and the Used Tire Management Program currently under development by Manitoba Environment. Principles of sustainable development, you will note, have been included and written into the front end of this bill. With the introduction of the bill, the proposed amendments will better reflect

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3582 cur rent approaches to waste reduction and prevention that are being undertaken in other jurisdictions and will again bring the act to the fo re fro nt of waste reduction and prevention legislation in this country. Proposed amendments provide the fo llowing capabi lities. First of all, they provide for clear authority for retailers to collect predisposal levies from consumers to implement a variety of economic instruments, including deposit retum and buy-back systems.

This is necessary, for examp le, for the proposed Used Tu:e Management Program that is presently being piloted. The changes to this act will permit the establishment of an ann 's length corporation to manage and administer waste reduction pro gram s and WRAP funds . These changes provide for the authority to the corporations to assess predisposal levies and to exercise the power of enforcement where necessary using the authority of the act.

These amendments will permit the establishment of WRAP funds specifically for the purposes of waste reduction and prevention activities of designated materials and to allow for their administration by this ar m' s length corporation. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if it is appropri ate at this stage of the debate , but I am sure you will call me to to order if it is inappropri ate. The drafters of the bill spent a considerable amount of time and were challenged in the work that they did to bring this bill forward in older to accomplish the legislative capability which I just referred to.

What will happen under the powers of this act is that we will have the ability to make sure that any funds that are collected as predisposal levies go into an independent organization which then will, through the regulated authority of the minister, be able to distribute those funds or redirect them . In fa ct, Mr. Speaker, that, I think , is a key to the public receptivity of this bill because it is virtually a guarantee that not one penny that is collected from these predisposal levies will be used for anything other than activities related to the collection and disposal of the materials involv ed.

Bef ore I leave that part, the reason for phrasing it the way I did is that I want to acknowledge the work that was done by the drafters of this bill , because it was a unique piece of work, one which challenged them and one with which they can take a good deal of satisf ac tion. Further, Mr. Spe aker, these amendments also retain the appropriate levels of accountability and control which are most ne cessary under any type of legislation where funds are being admi nistered . The Used Tire Management Pro gram is curren tly being administered under an interim board of directors and a program co-ordinator.

An industry run corporation using the powers of the bill will be established shortly to administer this program. A tire levy, as established under regulation, will flow directly to the corporation. The revenues from the current environm ental protection tax are held as def erred revenue and will be transf erred to the corporation. At that point, a Used Tire Management board will be established to oversee the administrati on of the program. This regulation is currently under preparation fo r public consultation. The real backbone of this le gislation, Mr.

Speaker, is the Manitoba Product Stewa nlship program which will be a province-wide initiative designed to increase recycling opp ortunities in the city of Winnipeg and other Manitoba municipalities. The program builds on the principle of distributor responsibility recomm ended as a key element of Manit oba's waste reduction strategy of the Recycling Action Committee, which began its work in 1989.

The ob jectives of the stewardship program will be, firstly, to maximize the reduction, the reuse and the recycling of designated products and materials ; secondly , to hold distributors of products and materials with the potential to become waste in this provin ce, bold them responsible for the cost of managing those wastes; thirdly, we will be able to provide stable long-tenn funding commitments to support municipal recycling pro grams, something

3583 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 that we have long been wanting to put in place in this province. The ob jectives will be obtained through the introduction of a regulatory framework devel oped, in part, to support the Product Stewa rdship initiative prop osed in 19 93 by the Canadian Packag ing Indus try Product Stew ardship Initiative. The stewardship program provides financial incentives to municipal govermnents to encourage the efficient collection, processing and marketing of recyclable comm odities.

Total program expenditures are pro jected to be $8 million annually when this program is fu lly imple mented. • (14 50) The Manitoba Product Stewardship program, as it is intended to be implemented, will do the fo llowing. It will establish a regulatory framework to set predisposal levies and assessments on designated products and materials. It will encourage the reduction, reuse and recycling of waste materials in this provi nce. It will establish a ma nagement bo ard and an arm 's length coipOration to administer the program funding.

It will provide financial incentives to support the collection and process ing of recyclable materials. It will support the development of Manito ba's regio nal recycling syst ems. It will establish a comprehensive monitoring program to provide for equitable fu nding for mulas and public accountabil ity. It will implement a province-wide antilitter campaign to complement recycling efforts. It will provide a strong public inform ation component to promote participation in the three Rs. It will provide incentives for the development of local end-use products. I do not think, Mr.

Speaker, that we can overly emphasize that point. Other future program areas to be addressed may include used oil, batteries, household toxic products, which would be disposed of in a much more careful manner than we are used to dealing with our recyclable materials . Mr. Speaker, in the introduction of this bill, I want to make it very clear that this is the first step to providing pro vince -wide recycling capabilities that will be, in my view, unequalled in terms of percentage of the population that is likely to be served.

This does take a unique and certa inly unprecedented approach to product steward ship , because while this is hinged on the regulatory capabilities that will be developed within the authority of this act, the opportunity to deal with a much wider range of ma terials is certainly available, will certainly be capable of being dealt with under the auspices of this act. I would recommend to my colleagues opposite that the debate pro ceed expeditiously.

The sooner that these amendments are in place, the quicker we will be able to put in place a regulatory program to begin developing the fund that will in fact lead to the improved management of recyclables in this provi nce. I would encourage them to enter into the debate , to ask any questions that they might want to raise , but I would encourage them to allow this bill to move expeditiously through the process. Mr . Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? Mr . Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster) : Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Osborne (Ms. McCo nnick), that debate be adj ourned. Motion agreed to.

DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS Bill S-The Fisheries Amen dment Act Mr . Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Natural Resources, Bill 8, The Fisheries Amendment Act; Loi modifi.ant Ia

Loi sur Ia pache , standing in the name of the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton). An Honourable Member: Stand. Mr. Speaker : Is there leave that that matter remain standing? [a greed] The honourable member for Point Douglas has 27 minutes remaining. Mr. George Dickes (Point Douglas) : Mr. Speaker, I will start off where I left off. I was reading from the consultant 's report, which is the investigation into the status of issues aff ecting the Manitoba commercial fishery. I was reading the part about the role of native people in a resource allocation, and this is from the report.

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3584 Where I left off was the transfer of management authority. It says: Over the fisheries resource from fe deral and provincial governments to native people and organizations, there was a general consensus that this transfer will occur and that, at minimum, will result in native people receiving specific allocations of the resource for domestic food purposes. There is speculation that native authority could be more far-reaching and that native people would not only receive a specific allocation of the res ource , but also would determine the use of that allocation.

At issue, is the nature and extent of management authority native people will exercise in the future. The potential implications for the commercial fishery are wide -ranging. The amount of fish avail able for commercial harvest will definitely change , althoug h the direction of change is impossible to predict at this time. Conditions under which the fish are harve sted, season dates, gear restriction, also may change and these changes may affect marketing practices and amm gements .

This impending transfer of management authority will play a major role in defining many issues confronting the commercial fishery in the future. The reason I wanted to put that in, Mr. Speaker, is because when this bill is brought forward-! know that in the past this government has not consulted with aboriginal people and aboriginal users harvesting the fish-and it says right in that report that in the future, there will be co management with native people in the resource management of fish.

So if this government is serious about doing something positive, they could look at consulting and working with aboriginal people s, especially in northern Manitoba and in remote communities. Because like I mentioned earlier when I was speaking, the negative impact that has taken place over the cuts to the Northern Fre ight subsidy-and it has a real impact- but when you talk about the south and northern fishermen, that the biggest impact it will have is on the Far North versus the southern part of the province .

Because even in southern Manitoba, Bob Christianson [phone tic], the president of the Lake Winnip eg Whitefish Commercial Fishe rmen's Association, and this is right from the Winnipeg Free Press dated April 25, 19 91, in which the president of the Lake Winnipeg Whitef ish Commercial FJShermen said: Fishermen on parts of the lake could lose $1, 500 to $3 ,000 in assistance per boat as a result of the scaling back of the Northern FJShermen 's Freight assistance.

So if that is the impact it has on fishermen from Lake Winnipeg, could you just imagine the real drastic impact it will have on fishermen in far, remote northern communities? Who lives in those far, remote northern communities? Who are the fishermen who operate out of those communities? It is aboriginal peop le. Just to re-emphasize that, it says right here that the Natural Resources minister at that time said he cannot deny that the cuts could lead to serious problems for fishermen whose spring season begins in about a month.

But, also, it recognized that the minister at that time of Natural Resources knew the impact it was going to have on northern aboriginal fishermen because it goes on to say: The minister said the major portion of the aid is being targeted to fishermen in the Far North.

So when the governm ent understood this very, very clearly, how could they now consciously go ahead and make that kind of a cut, because you know in a lot of those communities in northern Manitoba you have unemployment rates anywhere from 80 percent, 85 percent, 90 percent, some communities are 95 percent, and the only possibility of income for a lot of the families is through fishing, that is a given. It shows how little the government understands about the negative impact these kind of measures have on aboriginal remote communities. H you look at the whole bill, Mr.

Speaker, the real emphasis on this bill is increasing the fine from $500 to $10, 000. I do not know how many aboriginal fishermen in northern far remote communities have $10, 000 to pay for a fine , and in the beginning I do not know why anybody would break the law to begin with unless I look at it from

3585 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 a different angle and look at the last fo ur years of my experience and what I have seen happe ning. What I have seen happe ning is not very comf orting to one who was raised all my life in northern Manitoba and see the impact that is happe ning in those communities where the communities are so desperate for jobs and getting so desperate for oppo rtunities. I am just guessing here, but maybe the reason this government brought this bill forward is poaching or illegal catching of fish is taking place , and maybe it is increasing.

H it is, I only have to say to the government, take a look at why. What you are doing with all your negative cutbacks in northern communities, if poaching and illegal taking of fish is incr ea sing , maybe these individuals are getting so desperate that they have to resort to these actions to try and fe ed their fa milies when the job opp ortunities have been taken away . • (15 00) One only has to look at past budgets, this budget, and you will look at the impact it has directly on aboriginal people.

When I say the aboriginal people, the reason I say that is because even the Minister of Natural Resources in 1991 said that the portion of the aid is being targeted to fishennen in the Far North. So when people get desperate and people start losing even the resemblance of hope , then people resort to drastic measures. When you see that kind of an impact, all you have to look at is at what has happened to the ACCESS program , what has happened to the BUNTEP program-it has been cut back year after year, this year 20 perce nt. Social assistan ce, what has happe ned?

Foster care cuts, elimin ation of the Northern Youth Job CoipS, elimination of funding to the Indian friendship centres, cuts to CareerS tart, lack of action on the solvent abuse centres in northern Manitoba. How long have we been trying to get this government to take action to negotiate some kind of a deal with the federal government to open and operate a sol vent abuse ce ntre in northern Manitoba? The chiefs in the North have all gotten toget her and supported this.

They have all recommended the community of Cross Lake which is kind of central to communities, and they are looking at satellite tre atment programs in communities like Shamattawa, Nelson House , various other comm unitie s. What has ever happened to that? Nothing. So if you look at the impact that these cuts have had, no wonder people are getting desperate, no wonder people are losing hope . This measure again, without even consulting the people in most need and the people that it will have the real impact �re have been no meetings, no correspondence, I am sure, with the aboriginal communi ty.

One only has to look at the city here, in Winnipeg. A lot of the people who are living in the urban centres have fa mily in these remote communiti es, like myself, and we get food; we get meat. I get caribou meat. I get fish from my family up north, because that is part of my diet, and a lot of the other people who are in Wmnipeg here, the aboriginal people, I am sure that they resort to their families fo r a little help because of the diet. What about the impact job opportunities that should have taken place?

I have been here since 19 90, and I have been asking and I have been looking forward to an urban aboriginal study. That has been promised every year I have been here. Every year it has been promised. [inte rjection] Yes, that is right. My colleague from Wolseley said they have already spent-bow much?--over $200,000, at least $200,000, on this study, and we have yet to see one. The people whom I have spoken to in Point Douglas and around Winnipe g, I have asked them , have they seen anything?

No one has even heard of it, and yet we have paid $200,000 for this urban aboriginal study that no one has seen, no one has even-well, you cannot read if it is probably-! do not know if it is done. But imagine if you took that $200,000 and put it into the Northern Freight Assistance Program instead of cutting $90,000, if you used that to enhance the opportunities for aboriginal people in the Far North. Would that not make more sense? It would make a lot more sense than spending money on things that are not even taking place and create

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3586 some employment opportunities in these communities. It is long oveniue . People have been waiting for actions from this government. We hear different ministers talk about, oh, look at all the jobs we have created. Look at all the opportuni ties. But yet no one ever mentions that we have created X number of jobs or we have created X number of opp ortunities for individuals in northern Manitoba in these remote communities. All I ever bear at times is it is a federal responsibility. Well, whatever happened to provincial-f ederal agreements ?

I know I used to hear about ERDA agreements, northern developm ent agreements. I used to hear about these agreements. They used to get about $90-million agreements that were spent in northern communities, that benefitted directly the people who are getting the least amount of help from this government, I feel anyway. That is my own personal belief. Those agreements used to bring in at least $90 million, that gave opportuni ties to the North. Yet since I have been here , I have not heani of one agree ment that has been agreed to and implemented in northern Manitoba. I have yet to even see that.

If you look at the actions and why people are getting so desperate and losing hope, one only has to look at the unemployment rate in Manitoba. Maybe that is why our fines have to be increased from $500 to $1 0,000, is because people need to try to feed their families and maybe they are doing illegal things. But I believe that most citizens in Manitoba are very honest people, and if people do break the law or do take drastic measures, it is be cause that is the only alternative they have left to feed their families, because the opp ortunities, like I have said, have been taken away.

If you lo ok at Januar y of 19 94 , the unemployment rate in Manitoba was the highest ever. It was the highest, highest ever. I went back all the way to 1966, and I have not seen anything higher than January of 1994. It was 11 .5, 11 .5 is the unemployment rate in January of 1994. That is the highest it has ever bee n, and like I said, I went back to 1966. So if that is acros s Manitoba, could you imagine what it must be in northern Manitoba? It must be a lot, lot higher than that. The other area I would like to point out, Mr.

Speaker, is for three consecutive years , unprecedented in Manitoba, the unemployment rate was over 9 percent for three yem in a row in 1992, 1993 and 1994. So when you have such high, high unemployment rates like that, what do people do? How do you fee d your family? You have to fe ed your family, and if poaching has increased then maybe the governm ent should not look at penalizing more, hitting hanier over the head, like $10, 000. There are not too many people in northern Manitoba that I know could pay a $10 ,000 fine, to be honest with you. There are very few people I know.

So why look at hitting hanier, penalizing more, instead of looking at the problem and why the reason is if there is an increase in those areas, looking at the reason why and try and resolve the probl em? Do not add to it So look at trying to create employment opportun ities, increase trading opportuni ties. That is one thing that I believe that we should look at very , very strongly. Also what I would like to discuss at this time is when you look at increases of fines. Now you increase the fine from $500 to $10, 000.

Now if poaching and if breaking the law has increased that much, there are going to be individuals who will have to go to court. So I want to give a little advice to this government and to the new Minister of Natural Reso urces (Mr. Driedger) and hope he will listen carefully and give it some serious consideration here because when you have more people going to court and higher fines, that brings in more revenues for the Province of Manitoba.

So if that is a direct fine related to Natural Resources, then I would recommend to the minister, negotiate with his colleagues to look at using the income from those fines to cre ate opportunities for far northern communities. Put some of that money that you bring in, put it back into the freight subsidy program because the reason it must have been cut is because the government is short of funds. Well, if you are going to bring in new revenues , put it back to the

3587 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 same people who you are taking it from and who you are hurting. That, I will hope they will look at, and I hope that the new Minister of Natural Resources will look at meeting somewhere along the line with the remote, far northern fishenn en and the fishennen 's co-op like in Berens River and other communities, meeting personally with them and hearing first hand , because he is a fine gentleman. I am sure that the community would be very, very happy to share some time with the minister, and I am sure the minister will learn a lot.

An Honourable Member: He is a good man. Mr. Dickes: Yes, he is very good, and the community and the people will treat him excellen tly. That I am sure of. He will get a good education. I am sure, because his heart is usually in the right place , that he will come back with a new attitude and new positive ideas and look at enhancing the opp ortunities that are available to people in the North and not restricting and putting barriers up, because those days should be long, long gone. •

(1510) We should be trying to help one another and enhance the opportunities right across the province. There should not be a border where there is a line that says North and South and most of the money goes to the South, very little goes to the North. I do not think that is very fair and it does not help anyone . This is 1994, and whenever there are measures taken that are going to have an impact on aboriginal peoples, please meet with the aboriginal organizations and the bands and with the communities so that people understand what is happenin g.

A lot of times the individuals that are living and that will be impacted by whether it is a positive or a negative meas ure- [interjection] I can finish it right now. Okay. So meet with those communities, get some positive recommendations and positive ideas, and we will all benefit from that. The communities will benefit. We will benefit. You especially will benefit as a government, because you will be working co-operatively with the people for the bettennent of Manitobans and for the communities that will have the impact. Just with those short few comments, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to encourage the minister again to go to those communities, meet with the people and get some good ideas and share some of your own ideas, and hopefully right some of the wrongs that have taken place. I am very pleased to have had a chance to speak to this bill , and I hope some things positive will come out of it. Thank you. Mr. Jerry Storie (Fiin Flo n): Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a few remarks to the record with respect to Bill 8, The Fisheries Amendment Act.

I was pl eased to have the opportunity to listen to my learned colleague from Point Douglas who has a long history of association with many communities in northern Manitoba and a familiarity with a lot of the problems facing, particularly, the commer cial fisherie s in our provi nce. I too am somewhat surprised at the tenor of this bill. I have known the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr.

Driedger) for some time, and I would have thought that there are many more pressing issues in dealing with the fisheries activity in our province and the fisheries economy in our province than this minister has chosen to address in this bill. The government obviously is desperate, and I am not sure who they are trying to placate with this legislation. Mr. Speaker, this may be part of the govern ment 's ne w Justice package , the get-tough-with-offenders package , but they are missing the marlt. There are two problems with this legislation and the Minister of Natural Reso urces knows full well what they are .

The first one is that it is pointless to increase the penalties when you are gutting the inspection services and you are gutting the number of conservation officers, when you are gutting the number of people who are responsible for making sure that these regulations are ap plied. It is probab ly, if not countetpr oductive, certainly not productive. The minister knows as well as any that

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3588 increasing the fines and decreasing the enf orcement is not going to produce any kind of satisfactory result. Mr. Speaker, the second problem with the legislation is that it does not address the real fisheries problems that people in my comm unity state. I want to relate an incident that occuned last Wednesday in South Indian Lake.

I had an oppor tunity to meet with the fishermen, the president of the South Indian Lake FIShe nnan's Association and a number of other fishennen in the community of South Indian Lake to discuss their ongoing concerns not only with the variable and sometimes depressed price of their commodity, but to address some of the other problems that they face, pa rticularly when it comes to their relationship with the Freshwater Fish Marketing Cotporation. (Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Speaker, in the Clair) Mr. Acting Speaker, I have been, and still am, a strong def ender of the Freshwater Fish Marlteting Corpo ration.

The Fre shwate r Fish Marketing Cotporation is to fishermen what the Canadian Wheat Board is to fanners, and we know that there have been groups outside the pools and the United Grain Growers, outside of those co-ops to express concern about the role of the Wheat Board, and there are fishennen who express concern over the role of the Fre shwater Fish Marketing CotpOration. It is a single-desk marketing agency that controls in effect the price of the products produced by fishennen large and small throughout the pro vince . The plant, as my colleague from Transco na (Mr.

Reid ) has refere nced, is in that particular community, employs a lot of people , and by and large has done a good job of stabilizing the income of fishermen. But there are some shortcomings in that system, and I know that the board of directors of the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation are attempting to solve some of those probl ems. They are trying to expand their horizons, and they have for some time, at least on paper, been attempting to find markets for a lot of the fish that are being caught across Manitoba, again particularly in northern Manitoba, that are not at this point a marketable commodity. Mr.

Acting Speaker, there are many in South Indian Lake, including the South Indian Lake fishennen and fishennen in Pukatawagan, people like Matt Sinclair, who have been fishing for almost all of their lives, who understand the fishery intimately . They also believe and they have in the recent months been in contact with people who have marketing contacts outside of what are traditionally Fre shwater Fish Marketing Corporation territory. The Freshwater Fish Matketing C01p0ration does most of its selling in Canada, the United States. It has some markets in Europe and some small markets in pl aces like Japan.

There are large markets in other parts of Asia, in particular, and perhaps in other parts of Europe that have not been tapped. What we see happening now is a desire on the part of some fisheries that produce large quantities of fish, in South Indian Lake 's case more than a million pounds a yea r, the same with the Pukatawagan Fishennan 's Association who have access to some 1.2 million pounds of quota, who are looking for opp ortunities on their own. So, Mr. Acting Speaker, this bill addresses the penalty.

This bill attempts to deal with some of the smaller prob lems, most people would say, and yet there does not seem to have been any eff ort on the part of the governm ent or this minister to deal with the larger problem . I am not sure whether the minister has had an opp ortunity to meet with the new group , the northwestern fishermen, including the communities of Brochet, South Indian Lake , Pukatawagan, Granville Lake and Nelson House, who have banded together to purchase the fonnally held fish packing plant by this particular co-op.

Now they are looking to not only provide packing services for fishennen in the area, but they are also looking at an opportunity to process fish in that facility and they want some help. Right now there are many times when they are under the impression that the Fre shwater Fish Marketing CotpOration is standing in the way.

3589 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 Mr. Acting Speaker, almost a year ago now, I met with a group of Pukatawagan fishermen who had a plan to sell some fish outside of the traditional maikets that are sort of assum ed by the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation, and I was struck by the-and I do not want to be harsh here -some what paternalistic attitude that the Fre shwater Fish Marketing Corporation had toward this particular pro ject. We all know that in business and in dealing with the entrepre neurial spirit, it is not always those who have been at it the longest who are the most success ful.

Sometimes it takes a bit of initiative. Somet imes it takes a bit of desir e to make some thing hap pen. For the Fre shwater Fish MIU'keting COiporation to tell these groups that it cannot be done, when they are the producer, they have the know-how and they want to try, does not make any sense. • (1 520) I am not saying that individual groups should be competing directly with products that are developed by or markets that have been developed by the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation.

I know that that would be in itself counter produ ctive, but they should not stand in the way where they have not developed markets, where they do not have well-defined selling regimes, where they do not have brokers. There should be some incentive in fact for fishermen to create their own opportunity and that does not always seem to be the case . Mr. Acting Speaker, some many years ago now, the government of Saskatchewan introduced amendments to its fisheries act to facilitate that kind of entrepreneurial spirit within the northem community.

I would have thought that if we are going to amend The Fisheries Act, if we are going to spend the time in this Chamber, go through the motion, to simply increase fines as some sort of p anacea to our probl ems, I think we are making a mistake. As I said, Mr. Acting Speaker, this is not going to work. It is not going to work because the government is not committed to enfo rcement. I know that in every community that I represent, where there are Natural Resources officers, there are fe wer today than there were five years ago.

I know that the Natural Resour ce s, the conservation officers, tell me we cannot patrol the lakes in our region. We canno t do the job in terms of sports angling, and we certainly cannot do the job when it comes to the more remote lakes that are quite often the lakes that are fished commercially. Mr. Acting Speaker, we need I think a more aggressive, proactive piece oflegislation that deals more generally with the problems that the fishery faces. I wanted to put something else on the record.

This may offend some of our GRIP recipients , some of the members on the front bench who are the recipients, beneficiaries of the Westem Grain Transportation Act. Mr. Acting Speaker, I want to put the case to you, and I know that you represent a rural area . The Province of Manitoba and the fe deral governmen t--the Province of Manitoba, let us deal with them first , some four and a half years ago decided to cut by one- third the very meagre subsidy, transp ortation, freight, transportation subsidy that is provided to fishermen in Manitoba. That subsidy at that time amounted to some $250,000.

The governm ent chose, in its wisdom, to reduce that by some $60,000 or $80,000. For northerners, for my community, there are literally hundreds and hundreds of people employed in the fishing industry. Across Manitoba there are probably thousands. It is a multi million-dollar industry. I had to read and sort of-I was going to say chuckle. It is not really amusing. I know that it is a serious matter and that fann ers, grain fanners in particular, face serious problems as well. It strikes me as rather odd that this year the Western Grain Transportation subsidy is going to be something like $590 million.

That is simply a transportation subsidy. There is really no systematic support for the fishing industry, for the thousands and thousands of fishermen in the province of Manitoba. At the same time we know that the governm ent, in a news release not that long ago from Information

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3590 Services , was boasting about the contribution of some $360 million from both levels of government for the Gross Revenue Insurance Plan. So we have $590 million in transp ortation subsidy at the fe deral level. We have $370 milli on of subsidy from the Gross Revenue Insurance Plan. We have subsidized veterinary services. We have no-tax fu el. Where is the fair ness?

If you we re a fi sherman in norther n Manitoba and the government had just cut your meagre little freight rate assista nce program, would you not ask yourself, where is the fairness; where is the relative importance being placed; why has the fishing industry not received the kind of supp ort that many other agricultural products and producers have received? Not that long ago we had a chance to meet with the Keystone Agricultural Producers . I posed the question to the president of KAP and said that fishermen are no dif ferent than any other agricultural producer.

I said, would KAP propose the same kinds of stabilization program s, for example, that fann ers en joy, for fishermen? He said, well, we have never thought about it. I do not know if you have thought about it, Mr. Acting Speaker. If you look in the Department of Agriculture , you have stabilization programs for sugar bee ts, a stabilization program for honey, a stabilization program for onions, a stabilization program for pork, a stabilization program for bee f, millions and millions of dollars. Why should the fishing industry not receive the same kind of considerati on?

Why are northern fishermen in particular ignored? When was the last time that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Eons), the Minister of Natural Res ources (Mr. Driedge r), the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey) sat down with fishermen from Pukatawagan or South Indian Lake or from any of the other of the Island Lake areas or Berens River or Bloodvein? Mr. Acting Speaker, we have to correct that in justice. I do not expect that the Minister of Natural Reso urces in one little bill, Bill 8, is going to be able to correct the kind of inequality we see in agricultural product.

Fishing is just another form of farm ing. That is all it is. Yet because of the historic relationship between western Canada and our national government and the population differ ences, we are tre ating our agricultural products quite diff erently in this province. Ftshermen, quite frankly, are getting the short end of the proverbial stick or, in this case, fishing pole. So, Mr. Acting Speaker, I think that it is time that we addressed that probl em. I think that it is time that we took fishing more seriously as an industry.

I would add that most fi sher men, including the people in South Indian Lake that I spoke to last week, tell me that the ratio of fish that are supplied to the Fre shwater Fish Marketing Corpor ation-and it is prim ari ly whitefish, pickerel and some ja ck-but the ratio of marlcetable fish to rough fish, the fish that is not considered, not deemed of adequate quality fo r curre nt marlcets, the ratio is about five to one . In fa ct, we are throwing away between three and five pounds of fish for every fish that we attempt to marlcet.

In many countries of the world that would be deemed a tremend ous, a horrendous and an unacce ptable waste, and I think it should be in our commun ity as well. I would argue that the government should be doing everything in its power and not leaving it to the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation or individu al fishermen's associations or individual fishermen to find a way to solve that dile mma. It is something that we should be worldng on. So, Mr. Acting Speaker, I leave it to the Minister of Natural Resources to follow up and perhaps maybe withdraw this bill.

Maybe he should withdraw this bill and perhaps-[inte rjection] We ll, it is simply of little value. It does not really address the real problems fa cing fishermen. 1be minister might do us all a favour if he withdrew this bill and presented, even next session, a bill that was more comprehensive and tried to deal with the real probl ems. If he at that time wants to include some amendments that stiffen the penaltie s, increase the powers for inspectors and conservation officers, fine, do that. But if you are going to do that, do that

3591 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 in a comistent way and, at the same time , increase the staff who are going to enforce this.

The member for Lakeside (Mr. &ns) often referred to government laws and laws that we pass here that have the potential of being scoffed at, of being ignored, of being unenforceable as scoff laws , that they are laws that we pass in here with all the best of intentions , but there is no hope of them ever being enforced and people are going to look at them and ridicule them. • (15 30) The Department of Natural Resources is dangerously close to being in a position where these kind of amendments , because they are not enforceable and because they do not reveal the real issues, are not going to have the effect and the force that they might otherwise have had.

That belittles the process and the work that we do from time to time in this Chamber. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rose) : As previously agreed, this matter will remain standing in the name of the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton). Bill 4-'lbe Energy and Consequential Amen dments Act The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rose) : Bill 4, second reading of The Energy and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi sur I ·�nergie et apportant des modifications correlatives), standing in the name of the honourable member for Transc ona (Mr. Reid). An Honour able Member: Stand. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Rose) : Is there leave that the matter remain standing? [agreed] Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne) : Mr. Acting Speaker, I want to talk for a fe w moments on The Energy and Conseque ntial Amendments Act introduced as Bill 4. On scrutiny , this appears to be another parenthood and apple pie bill which gives lip service to the concept of sustainable development. I want to begin by saying that if major changes to environmental stewardship are to occur then there must be some real incentives for business and industry to act and to go as far as is techni cally and economica lly fe asible .

I believe there is no organization which moves fas ter than a properly motivated business , and the thing that motivates business best is an impact on its bottom line. If we are going to look at ways in which we can promote energy conservation, which I believe is implied in this bill, then we must explore the ways in which we can come up with real incentives as opposed to pretend ones. Over the last 10 to 15 years there have been significant developments in the area of environmenta l law, and these developments are of concern to business.

What began as one or two pieces of legislation has become a discreet and complex legal specialty . Accordin gly, there is not a comprehensive or coherent legislative or regulatory scheme and this bill, I believe , adds very little to the situation. We continue to develop a convoluted maze of legislation, regulation policy and guideline s, much of which is difficult to undemtand even to a legal expert. Some of the acts and regulations overlap and are app lied in a way that is neither predictable nor consistent.

Suffi cient to say that those who are active in the are as which may impact on the environment have nearly an impossible task as they attempt to steer their way through the legal responsibilities imposed on them by legislation. For environmental regulation to be truly meaningful then there must be enforcement and, again, I raise my concern that we continue to add regulation after regulation and act after act with no apparent recognition of the fact that as we do so we also need to add a way of enfo rcing the regulation.

This regulatory evolution is apparently being accepted as an inevitable development either prompted by those who are responding to environmental activism or those who are wanting to appear to be doing the right thing. Politician<� recognize that we cann ot make changes oumelves, but all we can do is go by our stock and trade, which is regulation and legislation, but we continue to do so without assigning the neces sary enforcement re sourc es. So the question is, are there other incentives which can provide a balance for punitive laws and regulations which would in

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3592 fact provide the impetus that we definitely need for change? The Canadia n publi c, in poll after poll, continues to be concerned about the state of the environment. It is interesting that 20 percent of Canadiam donate to environmental rights or green groups, and 40 percent of Canadians are reported to make their consumer decisions based on the ecological track record of the company. There is also no shortage of magi c bulle ts to fly at the problems of waste and pollution. Technology appl ication is not the problem .

Technology, the willingness or finding the incentive to apply the technology is what we need to concentrate on. One of the things that we have been talking about in other opportunities-we talked on a resolution on water allocation the other day. It seems to me that water provides us with an example that we ought to take and examine when we look at energy conservation. If water is provided to fanners and industries, businesses and households at zero price, users cann ot be expected to recognize the value of the resource, the cost of supplying it or the cost of disposing it safely after we use it.

Water is largely regarded as a free good, and users, who lack any financial incentive to economize, tend to use it waste fully. 1be same can be said of electricity. We need to exaniine our electricity consumption patterns and recognize that there are things that can and need to be done. We in Canada tend to look at this resource as being free ly and infinitely availab le, and in fact we in Canada operate on that presumption. A study that was commissioned by the Southam news poll evaluated the environmental perf ounance of seven large G-7 countries in the world.

It was interesting that France and Japan ranked first; West Geunany, Italy and Britain were in the middle; and Canada and the United States shared last place. Canada is the most wasteful among ind ustrialized nations with respect to the squand ering of our resources and the production of waste. Canada leads the western ind ustrialized world in energy consumption, using 291 gigajoules per person, while the United States uses 280. France uses 105; Italy, 109; Japan, 11 0; the U.K., 150; and West Germ any , 165, West Germany being the highest among the European nations.

They still use slightly more than half of that of the two North American nations. So we need to examine what are the real ways in which we can promote energy conservation. It is true to say that there have been some initiatives , and some of these initiatives have paid off. We have , for example , seen a payoff from the Power Smart program, and it has had the net effect of reducing energy consumption in Manitoba.

Add itionally, we have had some good ide as which came into being to reduce the use of fo ssil fueL For example, we have the methanol supplement given to gasoline now which reduces the consumption of the hydrocaibon portion of the fuel down by about 10 percent. 1bese are laudable initiative s, but we have yet to see any kind of initiative passed on to the consumer. I have a Mohawk fleet card and only put Mohawk gasoline in my ve hicle, but I still pay the same price at the pump for my gasoline as I would if I were buying 100 percent hydrocarbon fuel.

What concerns me here is we have given a tax break to the company to produce the fuel, but the tax break does not show up at the pump. So we need to do more than simply pass acts and regulations to change the pa tter ns of the energy-consuming public. I think that we have to begin by recognizing that we have to recognize our situation for what it is. We have no right to claim to be much cleaner than any of the Asian or European nations.

What saves us is we have a la rger la nd ma ss, smaller population base and relatively cheap resources which all ow us to continue to squander and pollute with impunity but without the more drastic and observable consequences that are evident in Japan andE �. . The countries that waste the least are less environmentally damaging than those who are more wasteful. So we need to acknowledge and take our rightful place as destroyer of the pla net. • (15 40) Going back to the act before us, what are the kinds of things that are present in this act that

3593 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 would in fact make a difference? Well, there are penaltie s, again, penalties for violations of $1 0,000 for individuals and $25,000 for corporations. But we continue to bear from the enf orcem ent of other acts and regulations that it is not simply worth the expenditure of money to pursue these acts and regulations through the courts and insist on compliance. The fe ar that I have is that again this is one more window dressing activity and that it points to us as interested in sustainable development but doing very little.

It just appears that this is one more activity for window dressing. I think what troubles me most is, in fact, it does weaken the regulatory approach when we continue to put on the books acts and regulations that we have no resources or will to enforce. So we have to examine whether or not the energy, pardon the pun, expended in developing and putting this additional regulatory framework into place, is going to give us the payback that we are expecting.

There are many useful activities which could be pursued, and I would commend the members to some of the efficiency energy conservation activities that were contained in the red book, which is so continually maligned in this House, but it in fact set out a number of very important and positive steps which could be put into place to have the desired effect of changing consumer consum ption patterns. Pelbaps the one thing that we could be looking to is some examination of our hydro rate structure. At this point in time we do not have a rate structure which benefits those people who are energy efficiem.

You do not pay more for the first amount of energy you use and less for the last one. That is an initiative which would in fact promote energy conservation. There are other kinds of things that could be put forward. The public education, as I say, has had some net benefit, but we could be see king other kinds of activities which could be energy conserving. For example, I note that in this building the lights all over the place remain on long after people are here to occu py the offices. We could be doing-[inte rjection] I have no windows, so you could not see from outside whether my light is on.

I do believe that there are many, many things that we, as regulators and legislators , could be doing which in fact would have a net benefit of making a bigger impact. In concluding my remarks today, I think it is important that we continue to act in ways that we can set a good example , ways in which we can focus less on regul atory initiative and more on coming up with good ideas for change. We also must continue to establish the context within which we operate .

We must recognize that we have to see the big picture and not be bamboozled imo accepting some- An Honourable Member: Bamboozled, is that parliamentary? Ms. McCormick: I will wait for the Speaker 's Ruling on that if you would like and apologize if bamboozled is unparliament ary. An Honourable Member: Oh, I think it is parliamentary. Ms. McCormick: It is parliamemary. Okay, thank you. We have to find ways in which we can do the more meaningful things .

So again these remarlcs are intended to go on record as being committed to the concept of sustainable development, but to question the wa ys in which this Energy and Consequen tial Amendments Act moves us any closer to having the desired outcome. The act calls for the preparation of an Energy Manitoba report within two years of it coming into force. When I got elected, I began to look at some of the reports that are coming available and find that many of the reports which are mandated in various statutes and regulations are not produced on a regular basis . Again, it does the same thing- Bon.

Glen Cum mings (Ministe r of Environment) : Not true. Ms. McCormick: The Minister of Environment says, not true. I am still waiting for anything newer than the 1990 report on the air quality

section from his own department which he has said, it is coming. In fac t, the last time we had a conversation it was coming soon, so I quite look forward to it.

June 15, 1994 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 3594 Again, what I am suggesting here is that what we have to do is, in addition to putting forth the regulatory and legislative words, we have to commit both by our actions and by the resources assigned to the departments to deliver not just the spirit of the regulation, but the action which is presumably called for. An Honourable Member: Oh, I think the spirit is every bit as important. Ms. McCormick: Thank you for that support.

Despite the legislation then, we have to figure out ways in which we can support the intent with some things that the public and the corporate community can act on. So I thank you for the opp ortunity to participate. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rose) : As previously agreed, this matter will remain standing in the name of the honourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid). Biii 9-- The Convention Centre Corporation Amendment Ad The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rose) : On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Indu stry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.

Downey), Bill 9, The Convention Centre Corporation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Corporation du Centre des congres), standing in the name of the honourable member for Inkster. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster) : Mr. Acting Speaker, it is with pleasure that I can put a few words on the record with respect to Bill 9. The bill in itself appears to be somewhat noncontroversial in my reading of it, and I have had the opp ortunity to have a discussion with a couple of other individu als with respect to it. I do understand that back in 19 72 there were short-term banking arran gements in which there was a cap of approxi mately $100, 000 that was put into pl ace.

This bill seeks to increase that from $100 ,000 to $250,000. The second portion of the bill really deals with the size of the board, and it wants to increase it from the 13 to 15. As I indicated, Mr. Acting Speaker, we do not have too much of a problem in supp orting both of those aspects of this particular bill. I did want to comment, however, somewhat briefly, Mr. Acting Speaker, on the make-up of the board of the Winnipeg Convention Centre.

I think that one of the things that we always have to be cognizant of is when we do have boards that the boards themselv es, if at all possib le, try to reflect the general demographics of the province of Manitoba. Competence, no doubt, has to be at the fo refront, but I do believe that we will find that competence can be sought out and found through the many differe nt communities that are out there .

There are virtually endless benefits by trying to at least strive at getting our boards, and in particular the Convention Centre Corporation board, because it brings so much to the province and in particular to the city of Winnipe g. The broader the base of repr esentation of that board, the better off I personally believe that it would be. Having said those few words, Mr. Acting Speaker, we are quite prep ared to pass it on to committee . (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) •

(1550) Tbe Acting Speaker (Mr. Laureo deau) : Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? [a greed] Bill 3- The Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation Amendment Ad The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laureo deau) : On the proposed motion of the honourable Minister of Hea lth (Mr. McCr ae ), Bill 3, The Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Fond ation de traitement du cancer et de recherche en canc6rologie, standing in the name of the honourable member for Transcona. Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona) : Mr. Acting Speaker, I am pleased to rise and speak on Bill 3, The Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation Amendment Act. I am sure that many of us have been affected in one way or another by cancer, whether it be fa mily

3595 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA June 15, 1994 members or friends or maybe even some of us, unknown to others, have even enc ountered personally and had dealings with the disease of cancer. It is one of those diseases of life that is very shocking. I am sure that when we learn that either family or friends have encountered or contracted the disease , it can place a great deal of strain upon the family and friends when it is learned that someone who is very near and dear to them has been d

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-5-48
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 5th hansardpdf 48.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	b6ff3a34d32576ba62cbde7f1666e0f668b75948

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