Manitoba Hansard — 16 April 1982 (Sitting 35, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-35

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Friday, 16 April, 1982 Time -10:00 a.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. D. James Walding (St. Vital): Pres enting Petitio ns ... Read ing and Receivin g Petitio ns PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Flin Flon. MR. JERRY STORIE (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the Comm ittee of Su pply has adopted certain reso lu tions, directs me to report same and asks leave to sit again . I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Radi sson, that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of Cons u mer and Co rporate Affairs. HON. EUGENE KOS TYRA (Seven Oaks): Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasur e of tabl ing the Annual Report for the year ending December, 19 81 , of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon our able Minis ter of Com munity Servi ces. HON. LEONARD EVANS (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker. I have a brief statement as Acting Minis ter of Natural Resour ces and I have copies for the ...

The Manitoba Water Resources Branch reports that very mild weather and showers that occurred si nce Easter Sunday have somewhat increased forecast peak stages on the Red River. Ho wever, peak stages will sti ll be below bank full at vir tu ally all points on the Red River in Manitoba. Min or agricu ltural floodin g may occur in low-lying areas. The crest on the Red is ju st south of Emerson today and is expected in Winni peg on Apri l 22 nd. The Red River Fl oodway was put into operation last evenin g. Our new Assinibo ine run off is ju st gett ing under way.

Flood ing is not antici pated on the Assini boine, but there is a chance of minor agricu lture flood ing in the Vir den and Grisw old areas. The Portage div ersion will be operated if necessary to prevent ice jams on the River between Portage and He adingley. The Shel lmouth Reservoir will be operated to store run off fro m the head water area of the Assini boine Ri ver. On the Souris River run off is jus t begin ning. Snow covering the Saskatchewan portio n of the waters hed is only partially melted.

Agri cu ltural floodin g will occur on the Souris Riv er and the In ternat ional Boun dary to Hartney reach and will lik ely begin next week. 1554 Peak stages are expected to be somewhat above those of '72 and somewhat below those of 19 79 durin g the first week of May. The Water Resour ces Branch emphasizes that above normal precipit ation during the next week or so would resul t in higher peak stages on the Red, the Assini boin e and the Souris Ri vers . Flood ing is not antici pated on smaller watersheds in Manitoba this sprin g. Many of the smal ler streams have already crested.

The Water Resources Branch is monitorin g the sprin g runoff conditi ons closely and will issue further bul let ins if necessary. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho no ur able Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. HARRY ENNS (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I know that I and all other members are pleased with this genera lly optim istic report with respect to floodin g conditi ons genera lly in the provin ce but, Mr. Speaker. I move to note that the one area where there is some seri ous flood ing taking place in the province is specif ically deleted from the report that we have ju st heard from the Mini ster.

I refer of cour se to the flood ing that is current ly taking place on the Fis her Riv er at the Peguis In dia n Reserve as a resul t of unauthorized structur es that were buil t last fall and I wou ld have to take the gov ernment to task in a small way for at least not noting that in this report. The situa tio n, whil e I don't want to exaggerate, has caused the clos ure of, I belie ve, two provinc ial roads.

It has caused problems of concern to communitie s such as Hod gson and adjacent farmland and I'm told by thi s morning's CBC reports, which I never doub t their veracity, that there may indeed be some possibil ity of evacuatio n of the Pegu is India n Reserve once again.

So, that the works undertaken as unautho rized as they were last fall and as predicted, by the way, by resource people last fall and certain local area res i dents, it wou ld be the heig ht of irony if indeed res i dents of the Pegu is In dian Reserve should have to be evacuated this sprin g whil e at the same time having caused undue damage to neigh bourin g and surround ing lands in the closur e of several provincial roads. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Mini ster of Fi nance. HON. VIC SCHROEDER (Rossmere): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I have a statement to make and I have copies. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Minis ter of Fin ance. MR. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to announce to the House today increases in the minimum wage for the Provin ce of Manitoba. Effect ive Jul y 1s t, 19 82, the minimum wage for employees 18 years of age and over will increase fro m $3.55 per hour to $4. 00 per hour. For employees under the age of 18 years the minimum will increase fro m $3 .10 per hour to $3.55 per hour. The special min-

Friday, 16 April, 1982 imum wage rate for employees servin g alcoholic bev erages will be elim inated. In Januar y of this year, the Min imum Wage Boar d was asked to review minimum wage levels and report back to myself. In March, the board subm itted both a majorit y and a minority report. In good part, the min imum wage increase I have jus t announced is based on the recommendat ion of the minority report. As members will know, between September of 19 76 and Ju ne of 19 79, there were no increases in the minimu m wage.

Durin g that period the Con sumer Price In dex rose 28 percent, while those who must live on the minimum wage saw no increase in their ea rn ings. In 19 79, 19 80 and in 19 81 , we had two 2-stage increases in the minimum wage that raised the min imum wage to its present level of $3.5 5. Between 19 77 and 19 81 , the minimu m wage increased by only 20 percent. At the same time, other workers in Manitoba experie nced a 37 percent increase in their weekly earnings and the Consumer Price In dex increased by 46 percent.

In other words, the purchasing power of our lower inco me citize ns was dete rio rat ing su bstantial ly. Com pared to other provinces, Manitoba mi ni mum wage earners were not faring well either . In 19 77, four provinces had minimum wage rates higher than Mani toba and the gap in rates ranged from five cents to twenty cents. Today, those same four provinces and the Yukon Territories have higher rates than Mani toba and the gap range is from five to seventy cents.

Saskatchewan, with a $4. 25 an hour rate and Quebec, with a $4.00 per hour rate, are now the two provin ces whose min imum wage is in excess of or equ al to Manitoba's. I ment io ned earl ier that the dif feren tial for employees who serve alcohol has been elim inated. It is the feelin g of this governm ent that the dif ferential was discrim inatory and based upon the erroneous assumptio n that tippi ng would, in every case, make up the wage ga p. It shou ld be noted that at no time du ring the last 10 years did the minimum wage board recommend the cr eatio n of this wage dif ferential.

In stead , it was the product of a Cabin et decisio n by the prev ious governm ent after intense lobbying by interested groups. Du ring the last few years the minimum wage in Manitoba has ranged from 43 to 47 percent of the ihdus trial composite average. From 19 69 to 19 77, the minimum wage ranged from 50 to 55 percent of the in du strial composite. The increase I have ju st announced will raise the minimum wage to the equ i valent of 51 percent of the ind ustrial composite, as it was in Ju ne of 19 81 .

In the past, minimum wage boards have recommended that the mini mum wage be tied to a form ula based on a percentage of the composite ind ustrial wage. This was again sug gested by the mino rity report of the board. I wish to inform members of the Hous e that my department is pres ently examinin g that possibil ity. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Memb er for Minnedosa. MR. DAVID R. (Dave) BLAKE (Minnedosa): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, we thank the Minister for giv ing this report.

It might have been more appropriate if the y had deliv ered it Wednesday night in the rather lengt hy speech that they deliv ered to the hotel industry look ing at the elimination of the special wage for beverage service employees. Mr. Speaker, I noticed that there is a minority and a major ity report. I wonder if the Minis ter will table those reports in the House that the wage has been taken from. Mr.

Speaker, this particular annou nce ment will requ ire obviously some further study rather than our qu ick reply this morning, but in view of the fact that we are experie ncing a rather dif ficult time in the emplo yment field with unemployment rates increas ing su bstantially every year, we fail to see on this side of the Hous e what this is goin g to do for employment. In deed , it's goin g to have the absol ute opposite effect on employment particu larly with the su mmer season and the employment of student help coming on stream. Mr.

Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, we wou ld like to have the Mi nister table that report so that we may give it some fur ther study because Manitoba, as we all know has done reasonably well in hold ing the level of unemployment to something reasonable in relatio n to the other provin ces in the country. It seems to be on the slide in the la st few months and this report I'm sur e, Mr. Speaker, will do little to halt that slid e.

As I say, it's hard to estimate from a qu ick gl ance at the Minister's release and until we have a good look at the report to see what they have based this increase on other than the ide ological positio n that they have of cour se that the minimum wage has to be among the highest in the country when we're one of the provin ces that maybe can least afford it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. SPEAKER: Befor e we reach Oral Ques tio ns, may I di rect the attention of honour able members to the gallery where we have 40 stude nts of Gr ade 9 standing of the Tuxedo Shaftesbu ry School.

These stud ents are under the di rection of Mr. Semotok and the school is in the constitue ncy of the Honour able Member for Tuxedo. There are 35 students from the Dauphin McKenzie Ju nior Hi gh School under the di rection of Mr. McCal l um. This school is located in the constitu ency of the Honourable Member for Dauphin. 1555 On behalf of all the honour able members, I wel come you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, I ask the question to the Acting Minister of Natu ral Resou rces, or perhaps indeed the Minis ter of Agri cultur e whose constitue ncy is involved in the earl ier matter of the flood ing on the Fisher River. Fir stly, I assume the governm ent is aware of what's happening there and are they doin g anything about it? MR. SPEAKER: The Hon our able Mi nister

Friday, 16 April, 1982 of Agricu lture. HON. BILL URUSKI (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, I'm advised that there has been communicati ons between the Pegu is Band and the Department of In dian Affairs, indi cating that the Provin ce of Manitoba is prepared to assist in the longstand ing dis pute in terms of cost sharing in the improvements on the Fis her River. We have communi cated those concerns to the Band and we're doin g in terms of putting our positio n forward to the Band and urging them that these struct ures be removed by them. Questio n, that's an answer to the long-term problem.

What about the immediate prob lem? Can the Minis ter confirm that there is a possibil ity of evacuatio n having to take place on the Pegu is Rese rve and can the Min is ter con firm that the unautho rized structur es will be removed by the Department of Na tural Resources? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min is ter of Agricu ltur e. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I can ind icate to the hon ourable member, I was advis ed late last night that the water levels ha ve stabil ized in the river. There may be the possibil ity of some evacuatio n. With respect to the removal of the structures, Mr.

Speaker, we hope that common sense and through negot iatio ns, this matter will be resolved and these structur es will be removed . MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: A final ques tion, Mr. Speaker, does this government acknowl edge that they are unauthorized struct ures that are caus ing the floodin g to adjacent farmlands and indeed endangering the Community of Hodgson at this time? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mi ni ster of Agricu lture. MR. URUSKI: Mr.

Speaker, there is no doub t that the Government of Manitoba, whether it was your admin istration or ours, did not authorize those structures to be put in. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Tuxedo. MR. GARY FIL MON (Tuxedo): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minis ter of Urban Affairs.

In view of a news report today of a $600 ,0 00 advertisin g contract for the fir st year of the Core Area Ini tiatives Progra m, this contract having been awarded to a firm headed by a campaign worker for the Federal Minis ter of Imm igration and Emplo yment, did the Minis ter of Urban Affairs, being Manito ba's represen tative in the tri-level committee which is administerin g the Core Area Initia ti ves Progra m, or his staff have any part to play in this decisio n? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Minis ter of Ur ban Affairs. MR. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There were tenders set out for the public infor mation campaign under the Core Area lniative. There were a num ber of firms that had tendered for the contract to provide the public information services for the Core Area Initia tive. Staff fro m three levels of gover nment, includ ing a represe ntat ive from the Prov incial Go vernment, reviewed all the applic ations, made a short li st of the appli cations and then interviewed each of the com panies on the short lis t. Their unani mous recommen datio n was the one that was awarded the contract. MR. FILMON: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I wonder ifthe Minis ter could indi cate if he agrees with an ex pendit ure of $600, 000 for the first year towards advertisin g particu larly in view of the many seri ous social and economic problems that face the core area and the lim ited funds that are avai lable even through the tri -level partici pa tion. Does he agree that this is a priority that ought to be a ma jor component of this program? MR. KOSTYRA: Thank you , Mr. Speaker.

As the member is well aware, there are a num ber of pro gra ms under the Core Area Initia tiv es, one of which includes the di ssemination of informatio n to the pub lic so that they are informed of what's go ing on with respect to the Core Area Agr eement. The public informatio n program that is goin g to be starting, that the member refers to, is one that the former Mini ster of Urban Affair s had agreed to as part of the core area initia tives.

We have made some changes in the way infor matio n is to be brought out to the public and, in particula r, we wa nted it tied so that residents of the core area would be able to get that informatio n because the proposal as it was prepared by the pre vious governm ent was to have a num ber of large advertiseme nts and that kind of thing which wouldn't necessarily meet the needs and get the informatio n to the core area residents.

We sug gested some changes , but that is one small part of the core initiati ves and I think it's important as the previous government had recognized, to get that informatio n out to the public so that they could be informed as to what programs are under way, what's contemplated under the core area initiative because one of the crit icisms tha t has been that the citiz ens in the area, in the core area in particula r, have not been able to get all the informa tion on the programs. 1556 MR. FILMON: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that even the advertisin g agency representative says that it soun ds qu ite frankly as though it's high, and in vie w of the fact that this $600,000 is only for one year of a program that undou btedly will la st a nu mber of years perhaps as many as five or more years, what form will this advertis ing take and what benefit wil l it produce towards this core area initiative develop ment? Can the Minister tell us that? MR. KOSTYRA: Yes, Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, the advertisin g will take a nu mber of forms.

It'll be in the form of brochures on particu lar programs of the core area; there will be aud iovisual displa ys that could be taken into meetings and to vari ous areas to explai n di fferent programs of the core initia tiv es; there will be some national advertis ing in order to attract ind ustry to the core area, to provide meaningful job s for core

Friday, 16 April, 1982 area resi dents, so it's a multif aceted approach. I might ju st add that, as the member has stated, the contract is for a one-year period and it's goin g to be reviewed after one year to determin e whether or not it is actuall y meeting the kind of needs that are, with respect to public informatio n. If it's determined at that time , Mr. Speaker, that the informatio n isn't getting out to the public, then it may be changed or altered as the need arises at that ti me. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Swan River. MR.

D.M . (Doug) GOURLAY (Swan River): Yes, I have a ques tio n to the Minister of Energy and Mines . Can the Minister advise whether there are any imme diate prospects for the extens ion of natural gas to other communities of Manitoba, particula rly the Swan River area and northern Manitoba in the foreseeable futur e? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of Energy and Mines. HON. WILSON PARASIUK (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, there have been some gr oups who have been talkin g about establish ing co-operatives to provide for a further distributio n of natur al gas within the province.

As the member knows, natural gas is dis trib uted in Manitoba by private companies and there have been concerns raised from time to time by various com munities that they have not been able to get an exten sio n of the dis trib utio n of natur al gas into thei r com munities. This is sur ely a matter that I in fact will look into, Mr. Speaker.

I haven't looked into it to date, but I will look into the matter that has been raised by the Member for Swan River and sit down with the com panies and ask them what their particular plans for distri butio n are or whether in fact they take into account some possible extensions into places li ke Swan Ri ver or places li ke The Pas or other places that, in fact, have made some representation in the past that they would like to see an extension of the dis tri butio n of natur al gas into their communities. MR. GOURLAY: Mr.

Speaker, I'd li ke to thank the Minister for that answer and I have a fur ther new question to the Acting Minister of Municipal Affai rs. I wonder if the Actin g Mi ni ster can ind icate how many terminati ons there have been on the Municipal Board tha t was appoin ted by the pre vious administration. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Fin ance. MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I'll take that question as not ice for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. GOURLAY: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, the Mi nister of Municip al Affair s ind icated a week or so ago that there had been a nu mber of new appointments to the Munici pal Board . I wonder if the Acting Min ister cou ld also take as not ice, if he doesn't know, whether these new appointments have been formal ized to da te. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon our able Mi nis ter of Agri cultur e. MR. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I'll take that question as notice. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS (Cont'

d) MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I trust all members will remember our rule about the reading of newspapers in the Chamber and if I may inte rrupt the proceedin gs for a moment to indi cate in the gallery that we have 40 stude nts from the Edwar d Schreyer School. These stude nts are under the dir ection of Mr. Lin denschmidt and the school is in the constituency of the Honou r able Minister of Go vernment Services. On behalf of all the honour able members, I wel come you here today. ORAL QUESTIONS (Cont'

d) MR. SPEAKER: The Ho no ur able Memb er for Robl in-Russel l. MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin-Russell): Mr. Speaker, I have a qu estion for the Honour able Minis ter of Labour. I wonder, can the Ho nour able Minister of Labour advise if he or the Minister of Co-op Development have had any meetings with those employees at the plants at Rossbur n and Pilo t Mound, who have offered to take a reductio n in salarie s to see if we can't get those plants open again? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Minister of Labour. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, that question has been asked a nu mber of time s by the member to the Minister of Co-op Development. The Minister of Co op Development is the lead Minister on that. He is aware that there have been dis cuss ions. I'm sur e those di scussio ns are ongoin g and when that Minister is back, I'm sur e that he would be glad to answer further questi ons on it. 1557 MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Hon our able Minister had any consult ations with these employees at Pilo t Mound or Rossburn before he made the statement this morning? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, I ju st finish ed tell ing the member - I suppose he di dn't hear so I'll explain again - the Min ister of Co-op Development is the lead Minister with respect to the issue that he raised. That is the Minister to whom he can address his qu es tio ns. As he can see, that Minister is not here this morning. MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, I don't know who I'm goin g to ask to get an answer for my question.

I wonder then, will any member of the governm ent advise me if they're prepared to call in MANCO, the Dairy Comm issio n and these unemployed workers and sit down with them and see if the offer that they made to take a reductio n in salary will open those plants at Pilo t Mound and Rossbur n?

Friday, 16 April, 1982 MR. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I' ve made that offer and I' ve had several meetings with the Chai rman and Ge neral Managers, I' ve ind icated before. That offer is open in terms of trying to assist MANCO and man agement in terms of their oversupply of cheese. They have used one route and that was the route to appeal the price of milk that they were paying to producers. The Natural Products Marketi ng Cou ncil heard that appeal and, as I understand it, the appeal was tu rned down. Mr.

Speaker, I'm sur e that the Board of Di rec tors and I have made this open, that we're certainly open to meet with them to see if we can ass ist them in any way in terms of whether it be management assi st ance, whether it be fur ther marketi ng assistance and our marketing people are involv ed, but all avenues certainly are open to dis cussion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Me mber for Pembi na. MR. DONALD ORCHARD (Pembina): Mr. Speaker, I have a que stion for the Min ister of Labour.

Could the Min ister of Labour inform the Ho use as to the current status of negotia tions on the contract between the grai n handlers of the Port of Chur chill and the Federal Gov ernment? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Minis ter of Labo ur . MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, that happens to be a que stion that the member should know is in the fed eral ju risdiction.

We have thousands of issues in the provi ncial ju risd iction that one wou ld think wou ld be important, one would think that we might even get some questions about the statement on the minimum wage this morning, but if he wants to talk about and fol low up the former Member for Rock Lake on que s tions about Chur chill negotia tions, that I su ppose is his choice. I unde rstand that those negotia tions, as they have always in the past, gone very wel l. The relations between the employer and the employees there are such that we have an enviable record.

I wou ld hope that other ports in this countr y cou ld in the futur e take a look at what happens there in terms of employer-employee relations. We expect that con tract will be final ized very shortly; there is no indic a tion of any real concern down there at this time and we are rather happy with the way thi ngs have gone. MR. ORCHARD: Well, Mr. Speaker, no one on this side of the Hous e is saying that negotiations and relation ships at the Port of Churchill haven't been excelle nt. The qu estion sim ply put, Mr.

Speaker, and it was put some two weeks ago is, has the Min ister of Labo ur made representations to the Federal Govern ment to ensur e that contract negotia tions at the Por t of Chur chill proceed very qui ckly to concl usion? Becau se, Mr. Speaker, as I poi nted out to the Acting Min ister of Labour some 1 O days ago, the lead time for the use of the Port of Chur chill is sign ificant and at the present time with no final ization of a contract there is a reducti on in the activit y of proposed use in the Por t of Chur chill.

I wou ld ask the Min ister of Labour if he could undertake to make a di rect inquir y with the Federal Gov ernment, with his federal count erpart, to assure that there are no undue delays in the contract negotia tions at Chur chill so that a major expor ter can undertake a new use of sign ificant export vol umes of grain through the Po rt of Chur chill this sum mer. An expor t deal, Mr. Speaker, which I might tell the Min is ter of Labo ur requir es sign ificant lead time and has to be acted upon very shortly. MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, it's pretty clear that the Member for Pembi na doesn't read, is obviously out of touch and isn't aware that there has been a tentative agreement, a package that was made public some, I believe, 10 days ago or at least B days ago. One would assume that he wo uld know what is publ ic informati on. I can assu re members opposit e that Members of this Treasury Board have, in fact, been in touch with the parties involv ed and we're qu ite happy with the way thi ngs are going there.

But as I said in my fi rst answer one wou ld think that they would have que stions about things that this govern ment does have ju risdiction over. MR. ORCHARD: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minis ter for providing the answer to my fi rst que stion now, and could the Min ister indic ate whether he expects, in consu ltation with the Federal Govern ment, the contract to be completed in the very near futu re? MR. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we have no reason to bel ieve that the contract will not be finaliz ed and ratified.

We expect it will take, as usual, a few more weeks because the workers do have to come back to the port and there are certai n time constrai nts involved. But we have no reason to belie ve that labour relations this time will be worse than they have been in the past; in fact, we are very happy with the way matters there have proceeded. 1558 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Tur tle Mou ntain. MR. A. BRIAN RANSOM (Turtle Mountain): Mr. Speaker, my que stion is for the Min ister of Labo ur ; it relates to his annou ncement this morning.

There is no question that all of us want to see people have a larger dispo sable income, to have an increasingly dis posa ble income. Our fi rst concern though, I think, of most people is that they want to be employed and that becomes evident. The que stion that my colle ague for Robl in-Russell asked which he prefaced with the remark about workers at Rossbu rn and Pilo t Mound wanting to take a pay cut in order to have a job and, Mr.

Speaker, in vie w of the fact that the announc e ment this morning will result in an increase in the range of 14 percent for the minimum wage for workers under 18 , the concern would be what effect that would have on the numbers of students that would be employed this sum mer. Mr. Speaker, my que stion then to the Min ister of Labour would be, was there an analysis done as to the impact that this will have on the number of people employed this sum mer in the provi nce, particula rly those 18 and under? MR. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Speaker, it goes without say ing that we on this side are very concerned about employment levels in this provi nce, as I'm sur e, peo-

Friday, 16 April, 1982 pie on that side are. I belie ve that the people of Mani toba are also concerned about employment levels and that's why they threw that bu nch out last fal l. In terms of minimum wage rates and their effect on employment levels in the province, I would like to point out to the member that although the NOP have only been the govern ment of this provinc e for some nine years out of more than 10 0 years, I be lie ve 112 years of our existence, we have annou nced a total of $2. 15 worth of minimum wage increases in that nine year period.

While the Tories and Liberals together in over 10 0 years have announc ed $1 .85 in increases of minimum wages in this province, ju st an example, and when we look back . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. SCHROEDER: ... to the 19 70s when we had eight years of government our unemployment levels were -(I nterjections)- it's pretty clear, Mr. Speaker, the members opposite don't want to hear the answer. -(I nterjection)- Bu t, you know, in the 19 70s, while we were -(I nterjectio n)- $1 .85 in over 10 0 years. In the 19 70s, while we were one of the leading provinces in terms of the minimum wage.

Our unemployment rate was one of the lowest in the country. There is no evidence that had some negative impact on what was happening in the province. We had people, our poorest paid people, who were able to spend mor e money on their li ving than they can now.

You know, betw een 19 76 and 19 79 there were no increases in the minimum wage while the cost of living for those people went up by 28 percent and the members opposite are now standing up and sugge sting that - they're not saying that they don't lik e the increase, but I would lik e the Member for Turtle Mou ntain to stand up and say whether it's too much or too little. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Tur tle Mou ntain. MR. RANSOM: Mr.

Speaker, if indeed the people, as he says, threw this bunch out last fa ll in the antici pa tion of getting larger, greater amou nts of jobs created in this provinc e, they're going to be sad ly dis ap pointed on the basis of the broken promises that we've seen so far. Mr. Speaker, my ques tion to the Min ister of Labour was, did they do an analysis on the impact that this will have on the employment of people under 18 years old?

I expect there will be a great many young people under 18 years old who wo uld fi nd it preferable to be employed at $3. 15 an hour rather than be unemplo yed at $3.50 an hour and I have simp ly asked the Min ister, has he done any analysis before this action was taken? He would be asked also earl ier, Mr. Speaker, will he table the report of the Board? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Labour . MR. SCHROEDER: Mr. Speaker, maybe if we drop the minimum wage to 50 cents an hour we would have everybody employed, maybe but I tend to doubt that.

I happen to bel ieve that we should in this province have reasonable, fair minimum wages. -(I nterjection)- wel l, the Member for Lakes ide is getting a li ttle bit excited and maybe if -(I nterjection)- Students in this provi nce will be receiving, compared to where they were four years ago and compared to the cost of li ving, approxima tely the same amount maybe even a li ttle less unfortunately. So, I wou ld presume that if things were relatively reasonable four years ago, they are sti ll relatively reaso nable with this increase. In terms of the -(I nterjection)- the member is aski ng about the report.

I have no problem; we will table the report. I'm sur e I will be able to get that out to the member for next week, but I would like to hear from the member. Is he saying that it was too much? Is he saying that we should keep the students back at $3. 15 ? Is that what he wants? Mr. Speaker, the member asked about an analysis.

I poi nted out to him, but of cour se he doesn't want to li sten to history; the history is, that in the 19 70's while we were one of the leader s in this cou ntry we had no worse an unempl oyment problem with youth or any other group than any other provi nce in this cou ntry, and we do not belie ve that we will have any dif ficu ltie s with respect to this increase. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, the Min ister of Labour says he wants the members of the Oppositi on to express an opinion. He sur ely knows that the ques tion period is a time for the Opposition to ask ques tions of the government. I asked a ques tion.

Although he did not answer it, it is quite evident now that we do have an answer. In deed, he doesn't know what effect it is going to have. He goes into a history lesson rather than tel lin g us whether or not this decision was taken on the bas is of the effect that it will have on employment. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I have a que stion for the Min ister of Energy and Mi nes. Yesterday, over the past two days, the Minis ter of Energy and Mi nes made reference in response to a ques tion, said that a final agreement might be expected on the Western Power Grid with in two years.

It became evident yesterday that two-year period would be dated from some as yet unknown time when an interi m agreement might be signed. In view of the fact that the Mi nister had also answered two days ago that negotiations for the Western Power Grid were on

schedule and in view of the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that the interim agreement which the three western Min isters had recommended to their governments last fall called upon the Mani toba Go vernment to beg in the necessary engi neeri ng and construc tion work on Limesto ne; in view of the fact, that on that bas is the government dir ected Hydr o to commence work, to beg in the necessary work to de-mothball Lime sto ne and start construc tion and beg in expending money April of this year, can the Minis ter of Energy and Min es advise this Hous e whether or not he has cancelled that di rective to Mani toba Hyd ro? 1559 MR.

SPEAKER: Honour able Min ister of Energy and Mi nes. MR. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, when the govern ment made that dir ection they did so in the heat of an election campaig n, when in fact the Cabi net had not even consid ered that agreement. There is no docu-

Friday, 16 April, 1982 mentation to ind icate that the Cabi net of Manit oba under the Conservative Gov ernment had even consi dered an agreement that put Manitoba at some sub stantial risk and yet, for crass politic al purposes, the Premier at that time had a big press conference tel ling everyone that everything was go. A few days later, other premier s said that they hadn't consid ered the agreement yet. The Cabi nets hadn't done so and what we had was a lot of crass political games playing at that time. We are proceeding with negotia tions , Mr. Speaker.

We are doi ng so without artificial deadli nes; we are proceed ing in good faith. I won't be coming here mo nth after month as my predecessor did sayi ng that we're going to have something starting in May; saying that we're going to have something starting in Augus t; saying that we're going to have something starting in September and everytime, Mr. Speaker, missing everyo ne of those dead li nes and falsely leading on Manitobans. It 's not the purpose of this government to misle ad Manit obans as the Cons ervative Gov ernment did for four consecutive years.

We, indeed, are pro ceed ing with the orderly development of Hydr o as we said we'd do and frankly we are considering the whole range of optio ns, Mr. Speaker, with respect to con struc tion, with respect to stockpili ng, with respect to adeq uate northern partici pation and construction which that govern ment never concerned itself with. We are doing all those thi ngs and we are proceedi ng, I thi nk, in good pace taking into account some of the fumbl ing that had been done by the previous govern ment when they made some commitments which would have put Manitoba at substantial risk.

So, we are proceeding well, Mr. Speaker. We get encour agement and good constructiv e responses from the Gov ernments of Saskatchewan and Alb erta. The only group that we have under minin g what's going on, Mr. Speaker, is the Conservative Opposit ion. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I have here a news rel ease fro m the Gov ernment of Saskatc hewan In formation Services which was dated the 23rd of October, 19 81 . It 's headed, "Blakene y Says Grid Recommendations Awaiting Approvals.

Premier Allan Blak eney said today that Minis ters negotia ting on the pro posed Western Power Grid are now taking thei r reco mmendation s to the requir ed governmental agencie s for review and analysis. The release goes on to say that the interi m agreement would be reviewed by the vari ous corporations in Sas katchewan by Treasu ry Board and Cabi net and the release says, Mr. Speaker, the Premier said an interi m agreement could be possible , and I quo te, "in the next few weeks." Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that the Premier of Saskatchewan said that an agreement was possible wi thin the next few weeks, last October 23rd, will the Min ister of Energy and Mi nes confi rm that the interi m agreement called for the Man itoba Gov ernment to beg in the necessary engi neeri ng and construc tion on the Limestone plant? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Energy and Mi nes. MR. PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, we are proceeding to meet the intent of our dis cussions with respect to the 1560 Western In ter-Tie development, but we will not do so by putting the Prov ince of Manitoba at risk.

I ask, you know, and I know that the Government of Manitoba didn' t look at that agreement. Saskatchewan at least had the foresight to say: "We are going to have Treasu ry Board review it; we are going to other agen cies do analysis of that." Mr. Speaker, when I met with them I had none of the other two Min isters come up and say that we have reviewed this and a Cabine t has revi ewed it and the Cabi net's accepted it. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, when we resumed dis cussions , the Alberta offi cial representi ng the Alberta Gov ernment said we certainly expected the Manit oba Gov ernment to want to make some changes to that agreement. If the Conservative Govern ment in Alb erta wo uld expect that a rational govern ment in Manit oba wo uld want to make some changes to the joke negotia ted by the Conservative Govern ment of Manitoba then su rely, we, as pragmatic govern ment, Mr. Speaker, under took our responsibil ity in good faith, we have in fact asked for some changes. We are having constructive discus sio ns, Mr.

Speaker, and the Member for Tur tle Mou ntain says that we should meet a schedul e and sel l out. We say that we do not sel l out to meet articifi cial

schedule s and tim etables, but that we are rather more concerned if we are negotia ting a 35-year agreement not to be panicked, not to be rushed by crass politi cal concerns, but rather to take our responsibil ity in a very hard manner, in a clear manner, to act as tru stees for the futu re generations of Man itoba ns and to negotiate a very fai r, good 35- year agreement that we wou ld be proud of 10 years from now rather than to try and negotia te something that would ju st get over an election, Mr. Speaker.

We don't operate that way even though the Conser vati ves do, as they did with the whole CFI fiasco that they perpetrated on Manit oba and it's rather tragic that they never learned from their past mistakes. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Min ister of Eco nomic Development. HON. MURIEL SMITH (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, the Member for Sturgeon Cr eek inquir ed qu ite a few days ago as to the role my department has played in the ban kruptcies affecting Sun Valley Poo ls and Wolch Apparel. Earl ier on there was also an inquir y about the department's role in the Metro Drugs bankruptcy case.

Si nce that time there's also been reported in the media the bankruptcy of the Seven Day Food Stores. I regret reporting that the power of our Provi ncial Gove rnment to stem the current dis turbi ng tide of bankruptcies such as these is not presently as great as we would like. Fi rst, the major policy factors under lying those bankruptcie s and too many other lik e them are strictly beyond our immedia te control; they are the dir ect result of the particular macro-economic policie s being practised in Washi ngton and Ottawa, Mr. Sp eaker.

These particu lar economic policie s were not only endorsed but also lobbied for by the members opposite when they formed the govern ment of this province. We are now witnes sing in Manitoba and throug hout Nor th America, the dis astrous results of Reaganomics endorsed by the previous Gover nment of Manitoba. The present Gove rnment of Manito ba does not endorse these simpl istic polici es.

Friday, 16 April, 1982 Secondl y, Mr. Speaker, I must say with regret that the Provi ncial Government's capacity to deal with problems like these cited is at present severely limi ted. The planning capacity, the analytical capability and the financial mechanisms requ ired to allow us to deal with the present crisis in an efficient manner has been effectively di ssi pated and dis seminated over the past four years. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honou rable Member for Turtle Mountain on a point of order. MR. RANSOM: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I belie ve yesterday you advised the House and the Min ister of Educ ation that lengthy answers of this natur e would be better filed in a written form. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Energy and Mi nes. MR. PARASIUK: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I didn't see the House Leader of the Conser va tiv e Opposition get up on his feet and protest when the.M ember for Pembi na asked a ques tion for about five minu tes. I think if you look through Hans ard, Mr.

Speaker, you'll find that some of the Opposition had been as king very very lengthy ques tions and we sat here polit ely while that was going on. When my col league gets up and presents an answer to a quest ion in good faith and it's a good answer, we assume that the ques tion was a good ques tion, we have the Oppo sition House Leader jumping to his feet because they don't want to hear, Mr. Speaker, they jus t want to try and undermine the process. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I thank both honour able members for their remarks.

It is qu ite right that I spoke to the Honour able Minis ter of Educ ation yes terday in making her reply and the danger in the Minis ter making a reply to a ques tion taken as notice is that it is easy for an answer to drift into the realm of a statement or a speech. The matter is something that the Speaker really cannot deal with and it must be left to the best judg ment of the Honou rable Min ister not to abuse the time of ques tion period and to make the answer as short and as concis e as possible. The Honour able Minister of Economic Development. MRS. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I ju st want to add one more point.

We're lim ited in our abi li ty to act in cases lik e Sun Valley Pools and Wolch Apparel because we cannot move in a pre-emptive fashion in a deli cate receiver ship and bankrupty proceeding unless the parties themselv es contact us. In the particular cases, there was no application by the princi pals for consulting assistance from the department and nor was there any applic ation for assistance under the In terest Rate Rel ief Prog ram. So, Mr.

Speaker, I submit that the specific information on the caus es of the problems with those particular companies have not been made publ ic and I submit that we must respect the confidential ity in those cases. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Turtle Mountain. 1561 MR. RANSOM: Yes, a question for the Min ister for Energy and Mi nes, Mr. Speaker. He earl ier did not answer the ques tion that I asked about the dir ective to Manit oba Hydr o commencing to de-mothball opera tions on Limestone. Has that di rective been cancelled? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Energy and Mi nes. MR. PARASIUK: Mr.

Speaker, the Manit oba Hydr o did snap to attention and undertake a massive project. They are proceeding to get operational again with respect to the development of Limesto ne and, in terms of the briefi ng material that I had received from the Manit oba Hyd ro upon becoming Min ister, Mr. Speaker, I received no indic ation that there had been any massive start-up but rather that Hydr o is proceed ing in an orderly manner to develop, I think, in a very construc tive way -(I nterjection)- No, no, what I'm saying is that Hydr o was proceed ing in an orderly manner.

I was saying that the govern ment of the day at that time was proceeding in a rather dis orderly manner, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for Turtle Mou ntain. MR. RANSOM: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Min ister of Energy and Mi nes took as notice some ques tions a few days ago about the cleari ng of Hydr o rig ht-of-way from Koostatak to Jack head Reserve. I wonder if the Min ister could answer those ques tions. MR. PARASIUK: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I don't have the material in front of me, but from memory, Manit oba Hydr o informed me that they were satisfied with that date.

They also informed me that the way in which the Department of In dian Affairs operated was to sub contract through a Band and it may be that work was contai ned to members with in the Band and was not sub-let out to other people. That is the responsibil ity of the Federal Govern ment. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Tux edo. MR. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, my quest ion is for the Min ister of Economic Development.

In view of her admission today that the Manit oba Go vernment is lim ited in its abi li ty to act on behalf of small busi nesses which are suf feri ng financial problems; in vie w of her state ment that she regrets that the Gov ernment of Manit oba cannot be of greater effect because of all the other problems that exis t; in view of the message from one Ho ward Pawley in this election docume nt called a "A Clear Choice for Manitobans" - poli cies of the Ne w Democratic Party - which says as follo ws, "We can provide interest rate reli ef and an economic cli mate to ensur e that small busi ness stays in busi ness, which she termed as a "crass political promise," as termed by her count erpart, the Minis ter of Energy and Mi nes, this morni ng.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Eco nomic Development. MRS. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite

Friday, 16 April, 1982 well knows, the bu ildin g of an alternative economic structu re here in Manitoba takes time and we are committed to putting in the investment in the primary resou rce field and to develop a sound well-planned publ ic investment program for the future. Mr. Speaker, these are not achievements that can be done over night because you need a sound planning capacity in the government. You need people who can do the thorough financial analysis. We are putti ng in place that capacity, Mr.

Speaker, and hope to bu ild to a position where the secu rit y of small, medium and large busine ss in Manitoba is much improved. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time for Oral Ques tions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Gov ernment Hous e Leader. HON. LAURENT DESJARDINS (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, would you call Bill No. 18 , standing in the name of the Honou rable Member for Vir den. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SECOND READING BILL NO. 18 -AN ACT TO AMEND THE PARl-MUTUEL TAX ACT MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Stur geon Creek. MR. J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek): Mr.

Speaker, the Honour able Me mber for Vir den adjou rned this debate on my behalf and if the Hous e agrees, I would speak on it at the present time. MR. SPEAKER: Agreed? (Agr eed) MR. JOHNSTON: Mr . Speaker, the bi ll is very straig htforward . It provides another 5 percent to the provinc e which is on the tri-actor races which is bet ting on more than three horses within a race and the province has indic ated that these fu nds will be retu rned to the ind ustry, the breeders and the horse owners. Mr. Speaker, this is credible.

It was recommended in a report that was commissi oned by our government and after receiving the report we took a step last year of increasing the funds to all sections pretty wel l of the racing indus try and, I think the step that is be ing made right now is one that is proper. I would caution though and I hope that there was a lot of research done regarding this, because it has been proven that every time you increase the tax on a particular race or on racing the bett ing will drop by approx imately 6 percent per tax point. Mr.

Speaker, the people will not go out and bet thei r money if there is too much of the money going to the govern ment and not enough being retu rned to the individ ual bette r. So, we would hope that the state ment of the Min ister of Financ e, because it is the type of race that a lot of people bet on and there's a lot of particular betting on the horses and it's more spread around in the tri-actor race, that it will not show that 1562 much dif ference, but I can assure him the figur es and facts are there.

They are available to him from the track; they are available to him from people who know the indus try very thoroughly, Mr. Speaker, and there is a percentage of betting drops off the minu te the people know that more money is going to the track or the government and not to the better. Mr. Speaker, I would only comment generally on the bi ll that has been before us.

Unfortu nately, the government is going to have to receive advice on this type of decision from a Racing Comm ission and it is unfortunately according to Jack Matheson in Metro One and Losier, who writes for the racing column in the Wi nnipeg Free Press, has said that the Com mis sion that has been chosen by this govern ment to gi ve them advice on this type of a bi ll don't know one end of a horse from the other and it's qu ite true. There's only one gentleman left on that board that has any knowledge of racing whatsoever.

Of course, the gen tleman that is the Chair man of the Bo ard is a well known bag man for the NOP Party. That's understan dable, I gue ss. So, the recommendations to the govern ment from the Raci ng Comm ission are very, very crucial and belie ve me, Mr. Speaker, the racing indus try are peo ple that are probably more concerned and more artic ulate about their ind ustry because it seems that when you own a horse it's something that is very, very, very dear to you and they are arti culate and they want thing s done properly. I know what part of the horse the Honour able Member for Elmw ood is.

He displa ys it all the time. There's no problem about that. Mr. Speaker, I would say without any doubt there is a problem at the track and the problem at the track is that the owner of the track is 10 0 percent controlle d regarding his income. The Federal and the Provin cial Gove rnments have complete control over the income of the owner of the race track in the Pro vinc e of Mani toba. He has no room to breath whatsoever. He is told how much he has to pay in taxes; he is told how much he has to pay out, all decided for him.

Under the circumstances, the tracks do suf fer very dearly and I would say that it is very hard for any government, this government and ou rselves when we were govern ment, to provide funds for a private owner of a race track, but I assu re you that they do not make the money, and it's all available in the report to the Mini s ter, that people think they make. So, you do have a problem, in that if you don't have a good facil ity, pe ople will not go out and bet.

If you don't have a good facil ity, owners do n't lik e to have thei r horses there and if you are, as I said before, taking too much tax, the government taking too much tax, betting goes down. So, you have to be very cau tious what you do in this regard because the income to the province, not ju st in the income from betting but the income from the provi nce in tourism that every thing go es with that track, is very important to us in Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, I think that there should be some areas and we did it on our side and I have a letter to the Comm ission , which I approved, that if the increased grants to the horsemen were made avai lable to them that they would, if they so desir ed, put a percentage of that increase towards improvements at the track. That concerned the horsemen and that really is the con-

Friday, 16 April, 1982 cern we called the back stretc h, Mr. Speaker, and the back stretch is where there are wash rooms, where the barns are, where the people involved that keep that racing goi ng that the patrons go out and watch every day have to have facili ties that are sati sfactory to them. So, I hope, Mr. Speaker, that the Min ister or the government will be givi ng the Commis sio n di rections that they may - they do n't have to, the money is their::;, but they may.

I don't think that pressur e should be put on the track to tell them to go and pressur e the horsemen and pressure the breeders for their fu nds, but I think it shou ld be made available or the knowl edge shou ld be made availa ble to the people who are receiving these extr a funds tha t if they choose to help the track upg rade the facil ity they are very involv ed with every day with their ani mals and the comfort of ani mals and the comfort of human beings out there which cou ld be improved that they would have the right to do so. Mr.

Speaker, I would only sinc erely say that I hope that the Comm ission that Ja ck Matheson refers to as not knowi ng anything about racing, not knowing which end of the horse to look at and the criticism of Har old Losier, when I say Harold Loster is very know ledgeable about raci ng, is not going to be true. I can tell the Min ister when the previous commissioner of racing said he was resi gnin g, he advis ed the Mi nis ter to have people who were experien ced in racing take over the Racing Comm ission. This obviously has not happened and I hope it does n't prove disas trous. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Eco nomic Development. MRS. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate a chance to comment on this bi ll and I also appreciate the thoug htful input from the member opposite. I can certainly agree with him whole hearted ly that people involved in the horse ra cing industr y seem to have a particular enthusiasm and abi lity to promote their leg iti mate interests. I have enjoyed the representations that they have made indiv id ually and in groups to me and I feel a very strong commitment to the develop ment of a healthy indus try here in Manit oba.

I' d lik e to comment on jus t a few of the poi nts he raised . The concern that if one raises the amount of tax that is taken out of the indus try that one will have an immedia te negative effect on the betting is particu larly true with ordin ary betting, Mr. Speaker, but it is less true in its impact on exot ic wageri ng. Exo tic wag ering is a kind of betting where knowledge of the horses and the conditions, expertise if you lik e, is less relevent.

It's more akin to a lottery sty le of bett ing and although it does add a great deal of interest to the people who attend the track, the research does not demonstrate that an increase in take out on that por tion of the betting does have the same type of impact on the amount of the betti ng.

With regard to the new Comm issi on, I can appre ciate the feeli ngs of people who spend their entir e li ves or a sign ificant proportion of their time and energy involv ed in the horse racing ind ustry, but I can assure all members here and the publ ic at large tha t having an interest in the horse racing ind ustr y and being involv ed in it does not ensur e that any one group understands or is close to the concerns of other groups. There are several actors, if you li ke, in the horse raci ng industr y and in establ ishing a commission.

Our prime concern was to appoint people who would take the role seri ously of link ing the publ ic interest components of the horse racing indu stry with the legiti mate concerns of the different components of the indus try; the breeders, the horsemen and the track; as well as the bett ing publ ic. I have confid ence that the people we have named to that Comm ission are carrying out that task with great attention and competence.

I am very pleased to report that in the short time that the Comm ission has been operative, they have met with representati ves of all the group s in a joint meet in g and they are also setting up appointments tomo r row with representatives of the groups ind ivid ually so that they can get both the group dis cus sion and the individual interest group input. The commissioner tells me that the ques tion of how the indus try devel opment levy is to be all ocated is one that he has put to the group s. Now, they have not been used to looki ng at the problem from that co-ordi nated posit ion.

They've been used to lobbying for their particular group. He tells me that the response of the groups have been most heartening to date, that the degr ee of con census not complete concensus because it would be naive to expect it, but that the degree of concensus achieved in the early meetings is quite remarkable. There is a strong prospect that the recommendation that will come through will have very stro ng support from all the major groups.

So, I do assur e the sports writer s and the members opposite and people inter ested in the horse racing industr y that I am getting very positiv e response from the people who are appearing befo re the Comm ission as well as from the people on the Comm ission who feel they are maki ng very constructive advances in solvi ng the problems. With regard to the track owner, we recogn ize that the track owner is a thir d major party in these negotia tions, so their concerns, particu larly the need for improvement in the back stretch, is part of the cu rrent consu ltation.

There's also an unknown factor as yet, in that there may be Federal changes in the law that will permit take out that will gi ve more return to the track later in the year. It may be a final determi nation on how these levie s are to be all ocated, may have to either wait that development or a portion of the all oca tion may have to wait, but I assur e you that the com mission are quite capable and willing to spend the time analyzing the ind ustry and coming up with a fair recommendation. 1563 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Tuxedo. MR. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, I jus t wanted to make some very brief comments. In view of the fact that I too have had some discussions with horsemen in Mani toba who are concerned about the eventual dis posi tion of the proceeds from this additional tax that wou ld be levied on certain types of betting in Mani toba, and although the Min ister of Economic Devel opment has spoken in terms of a variety of options, there is a concern that certai n pressures can arise that will limit the options and that will force certain deci-

Friday, 16 April, 1982 sions . I'm sur e that the Min ister is wel l aware, in terms of economic development, of the substa ntial amount of capital investment that many of those involv ed in the horse race indus try in Manit oba do have, particu larly the horsemen who whether they're involv ed in breed ing, ownership, trai ning or what have you of horses have normally a substa ntial capital investment in land, auxil iary bu ildi ngs, equipment and so on, if not the horses themselves.

I believe that the horse men are concerned that the govern ment, through this Min ister's department or inde ed through the Raci ng Co mmission, do defi ne ju st what they intend with respect to the eventual dispostion of this additional tax. Is it intended to go dir ectly to the horsemen for additional use on their part to sti mulate further the horse breed ing and ownership ind ustry in the prov ince or is there some other intention on the part of the govern ment?

If this Min ister of Economic Develop ment or the Min ister of Fi nance, under whose ju risdic tion this bi ll comes forward, could bring some sort of response on that matter to Comm ittee, then obviously we would be in a better position to consider the effects of it and the advis abi li ty of this tax measur e at that time. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Gove rnment Hou se Leader. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, I propose to move that we di ssolve into Comm ittee of Su pply, but before that I wonder if I could sugge st that you adjourn the House.

There has been an understanding that we will not have a Private Members' Hour and that there is a possibil ity that one Comm ittee anyway could finish before 12 :30, so it might make thi ngs a li ttle easier if we could adjourn the Hous e with the understanding that we will go in Comm ittee until 12 :30. -(I nter jection)- You can take it in Comm ittee; you can ring the bell, that's all. MR. SPEAKER: Would it suit the convenience of the Hous e if the Honour able Go vernment House Leader were to move the House into Comm ittee and to adjourn the Hou se at 12 :30? MR. DESJA RDINS: I'd lik e to move, Mr.

Speaker, seconded by the Min ister of Hig hways, that Mr. Speaker do not leave the Chair and the Hous e reso lve itself into a Comm ittee to consider the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION pre sented and carried and the Hous e resolved itself into a Comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honour able Member for Flin Flon in the Chair for the Depart ment of Agricultur e and the Honour able Member for River East in the Chair for the Department of Eco nomic Development and Tourism. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ECO NOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, Phil Eyler (River East): 1564 The Comm ittee will come to order. We are on topic 1. (b )

(1) Exec utive Salaries. The Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Chairman, I'd jus t lik e to follow the lin e of que stion ing that was being carried on last night and I would refer to the Minis ter's statement that the present government is looking for long-term investment in the province that will bring long -term advantages to the people of the Province of Manitoba, and I refer to the Alcan Plant. In the conditions on the Alcan Agreement the word "owner ship" was used and it was also stated that the Plant or that Alc an would be paying for anything they received.

That is true, but it's not ownership that they would be paying for. The Manitoba Hydr o would own the power plant. The Al can Company wou ld pay their portion towards the construc tion of that Plant and that portion is for the amount of power they would be usi ng. If you pictur ed a power plant that may have 1 O or 12 gener ators in it, Alcan would requir e the use of approxima tely two generators to have 400 megawatts of power from them. It would not be unl ike them being in a condom inium.

The power plant would be owned by Manit oba Hydr o; that power plant would pay the water rates that woul d be decided upon by the Lieutena nt-Governor-in-Council or the govern ment of this provinc e. They would also pay their way, as far as maintenance is concerned, and I belie ve they would pay -and I use the word, beli eve - some costs towards transmission, etc. When they say they would pay all those mainte nance costs, they would pay up front, which was estima ted to be about $600 million towards the con struction of that plant, which would take it off the backs of the people of Manit oba.

Jus t calcula te the interest on $600 milli on that the people of Mani toba would not have to pay. The reason for them wanting that requir ement is because 40 percent of the cost of manufacturing alu minum is hydro power and they are spending to bu ild a refi nery in 19 81 dollar s, they estimate at the present time, about $850 mil lion; $850 milli on, which would mean in construction jobs approxima tely no less than 600 and 600 permanent jobs.

If somebody is spending that kind of money, I don't really believe that wo uld be a short-term investment for the people in Manit oba, for the people of Manitoba, nor do I belie ve that they would want to pick it up and move it tomo r row under those circumstances. The que stion was raised regarding the location of the plant and the previous govern ment did not get involved. There is nothing further from the facts.

The previous govern ment allo wed Alcan, or not allo wed, they're perfectly free to do so in this provi nce, to make extens ive presentations to many, many areas of the provinc e, and in return there were many ext ensive presentations by cities and municipalitie s in this prov ince asking Alcan if they would locate in their area. Alcan had a problem in that the Plant, the plant that would be lik e the Grande Baie Plant, must be bu ilt on a firm foundation from the point of view that they cannot go into too much excavation.

The plant is too exte nsive so they must have a rock formation within the province that the plant can be built on. This was all carried on during a close to a 3-year

Friday, 16 April, 1982 period. The Department of Economic Development were the fi rst department to work with Alcan and when the time came for them to go into negotiations regardi ng the requ irements of power, Mr. Craik took it over as Min ister of Energy and it was advisable then that a committee led by Mr. Cr aik would handle the negotia tions regardi ng the power supply , which was very understandable, and as mentioned, he us ed many consu ltants. Alcan came to the Gov ernment of Manitoba and showed us six places where they could conceivably buil d a plant because of the rock formation.

They took into consider ation the rail roads; there are two rail roads in the area that they chose. They took into consid eration the power li nes that were coming down to the plant.

The took into consi deration the infras tructur e that would be requi red for the muni cipalit ies arou nd them and it was one of the best in that there were many good siz ed towns in the area that had schools, and it wasn't a case of havi ng to buil d a new tow n, it was a case of having to expand the facil ities with in those very good towns that we have in the Pro vi nce of Manitoba, and that people would be spread out in di fferent areas and there would proba bly be enough schools, probably enough, but there may have had to be more.

The towns themselves that would have the increase in population woul d increase their tax base. No w we have an $800 milli on refi nery in a location that was wo rked at very thorough ly, and when it was presented to the government, we said, wel l, all six, we don't have any real concerns regardi ng the six and I think that you have to go back to your Boar d of Di rec tors and have them decid e or tell us where they would li ke to go. That's exactly what happened and they informed us that they wanted to go in the Bal moral area. Mr.

Chairman, the plant itself, in that area, would be a tremendous benefit to all people concerned and it was su ited, that particular area, as it wou ld have suit ed any one of the six others; it suit ed that area. Mr.

Chairman, the Alcan, if anybody wants to take the time to read the Winnip eg Construc tion Associa tion Report, where there was a speaker from Alcan there, he said there would be 19 0 carpenters, 300 electricians, 230 steel or line workers, 60 re-bar workers, 80 boilerma kers, 70 pipe weld ers for a total of five mil lion man hours of di rect on-site employment in that plant - $88 1 milli on and they belie ve, in fact they estimate that 60 to 70 percent could be spent in the Province of Manitoba. This

article confirms, from the construc tion people of Manitoba that were at the meeting, that they could handle that type of work. Alcan would consider using the same process for calling tenders as they had in the Quebec smelter by breaki ng the total job down in to smal ler packages allowing local contractors to have the opportu nity to tender. For exa mple, in Quebec, 32 fou ndation con tracts had been awarded with a combi ned value of 43 milli on. Also, a total of 18 electrical contractors to the total of 9.3 mil lion. Mr.

Chairman, the state ment that the overall long term advantages for Al can might not be there, I assure you is there. I can also assu re you that the spinoff to the busi nessmen wi thin this provi nce, small busine ss wi thin this provi nce, would be enhanced by the tune of 60 to 70 percent of $850 milli on worth of construc tion.

They would probably, and there is no do ubt in my mind, that they would have to purchase maybe some equ ipment to handle some of this work, and that equ ipment would lead those small companies into the position of being able to quote on other larger pro jects that would take place in Manitoba or througho ut Western Canada. Mr. Chair man, Alcan has made the statement that they have to increase, they have to bui ld, accordi ng to this, four or five more smelters the size of the one proposed for Manitoba.

They would requ ire four of those with in the next 20 years and for the Minis ter who's in charge, the Min ister of Energy, but the Min is ter of Economic Develo pment is on this committee, to even sup pose that this can be held up because maybe the aluminum market is dow n, is absol utely wrong. Alcan produces aluminum which is a product, a ligh t wei ght material, which is going to be in demand for all kinds of reasons in this cou ntry and internationally in this world for a long time. They have to increase their production and they will. Mr. Chair man, the plant in Gr ande Baie is jus t a massive plant.

The scru bbing materials or process for cleari ng up emissions cost $90 mil lion. In the Arvid a plant, the fi rst one that was buil t by Alcan in Canada, they coll ected approxima tely 52 percent of emissions when it was buil t. They increased that to about 73 percent. They can't get it any better because it's an old plant. In the new plant they estimated that they would colle ct 94 percent of emissions and that sinc e it's open it has coll ected 96 percent of emissions coming from that plant.

Of cou rse, Alcan wants to have a large piece of land around them where they have cattle; where they grow flowers; where they grow vegeta bles and they test them all contin ually. The Minis ter has admitted or not admitted, and I very sinc erely appre ciate the fact that she thi nks that the envi ronmental problems can be overcome; they have to be overcome because if they don't meet the specifica tions of the Provinc e of Manitoba, not even I would want to see it buil t. 1565 Mr.

Chairman, the Alcan project from the point of view of long-term benefit to the people of Manitoba, I think is what the Minis ter has been sa ying that she wants to have in this provi nce. Mr. Speaker, the indi cation that Alcan shoul d buil d in this provi nce some produc tion for aluminum is jus t not the thing to be negotiating at the present time. You are deal ing with the Alcan Refin ery Lim ited who produces aluminum ingots to supply to manufacturers to produce alumi num products.

If this government believes that so me body is going to pick up a $25 milli on, $75 milli on or even a $10 0 milli on do ll ar plant and put it in Manitoba to produce pots, pans or whatever may be produ ced from aluminum, you' ve got another thing coming. Nor are they going to buil d another plant, if the plants they have at the present time have the capacity to supply the market. So, that is dreaming. The job of the department is to go and find people, go and fi nd people that need aluminum and if they want to be near the smelter, so much the better.

Bu t, to say to the company if you'r e going to produce ingo ts here, you have to produce other products here, you are dealing with two dif ferent companies. They are the same but there's Alcan Refi ning and there's

Friday, 16 April, 1982 Al can, I'm not sur e what they call the other part of the corporation. Mr. Chairman, the Alcan Corpor ation is a Canad ian Corpor ation. Sur e, they have tie s and very large hold ings all over the wor ld, but it is basically a Canad ian Corpor ation. To say that we should be now starting to tur n to look to others is sheer nonsense. That's my opinion,. I gue ss, but it's sheer nonsense. We did have conversations with other people, but when we approached Alcan they said they would come to Manitoba and they would do a sur vey.

They would find out if it was economic al to produce ingo ts in the middle of Canada, the fi rst inla nd aluminum smelter practically in the world. They came and they did their studie s. The y found out they could bri ng alumina to that plant, economically to Manitoba. They fou nd out that it would be a good area for them to be in and mainl y because we have the power. They moved ahead; they said we will do these studie s; they worked with the government; they were the agg ressive peo ple; and they are probably one of the two, they are one of the two largest producers of aluminum in the world.

Take a look at the percentages of aluminum pro duced by other people other than Alcola and Alcan. So, what was wrong with moving forward with a com pany who was aggr essively interested and si ncerely interested in the Pro vince of Manitoba, and to say that the scale that was referred to last night regard ing charges is not rig ht; fine, if you want to renegotia te with them so much the better.

But to hold up or even consider holding up the negotia tions with Alcan on the bas is that you don't want them to own an alumi num plant doesn't hold water, a power plant doesn't hold water, because they don't want to own one. You have said that they have dif ferent arrange ments in dif ferent places - the arrangement of taking $600 mil lion off the backs of people of Manit oba is not a bad arr ange ment.

The other silly argu ment that we can't negotia te unless we approve or like the alumi num company's advertising is a sheer admission that the Min ister of Energy is not capable of negotiating under those circu mstances. It is ridiculous to have this program held up in any way, shape or form. The Provi nce of Manit oba at the present time has lost a lot of its transfer payments. You r economy is down and your tax doll ars are going to be hard to come by.

There is no other way, as my colle ague from Tuxedo said last night, that we are going to have income in this provi nce unle ss we have good invest ment and I can't see anything wrong with investment and neither can the Min ister, accordi ng to her state ment, that is going to be here for probably 10 0 years. Maybe that's over exagger ating. And a 35 year agreement to have a $800 milli on spent on a refinery that will create the kind of benefits to the people of Manitoba, small busi ness and everything etc., is what you're going to have to have or you won't be able to build those houses.

I might ju st correct a statement I made last nig ht; I said we built more public housing in Wi nnipeg in four years than the previous govern ment did in eight. I correct the state ment by saying we bu ilt more public housing in the core area of Wi nnipeg where it was needed in four years than there was built in the pre vious eight years. So you won't be able to have those social services. you won't be able to move forward on that unless you're prepared to become ju st a tattle tale provinc e that's going to run around holding the coattai ls of the Federal Gove rnment and begging for them day after day.

This provinc e has to move to start to become more independent and with the project such as Alcan; the project on the western side of the province, the potash one; the project on the Power Grid which the Min ister of Ener gy gets up and states that it wasn't consider ed by Cabi net.

Quite true, but I would doub t if any Mini s ter in any province who was in negotiations with other provin ces that was putting forward a presentation to thei r Cabi nets wo uld have to have some feeling that these were going to be consid ered by the Cabi nets very sinc erely and I assur e you that that's the way that the thi ngs were done on all parties; even the Pr emier of Saskatchewan said that it was very close. So what were we looking at we were looking? We were looking at three hard, tou gh years of negotia tions. It wasn't done overnig ht.

We would have had potash, and by the way the potash would have been the Potash Cor poration of Manitoba, with the oppor tunit y to start with 25 percent, the govern ment own ing 25 percent, with the option to buy up to 49 percent. Is that not govern ment in join t venture with bus iness? What is wrong with those type of negotiations or are we going to sit back and take the same attitud e with that one as we are taking with Alcan that maybe the aluminum market is down. Well I assu re you interna tional minerals and chemicals and potash companies are looking for the futur e.

They're not sitting around wait ing for the next two or three years, and if we are going to sit back and let Saskatchewan sell their potash while our stays in the grou nd, this govern ment will be making a very great mistake. So what wou ld we have? We had the alu minum in the centre of Manitoba; we would had the potash in the western part of Manitoba; we had the Power Gr id start ing to move forward; we had the work bei ng done on ManFor.

We weren't putti ng a bu nch of smoke stacks in one area; we had spread the economy out through the whole economy of this provinc e, which wou ld have come to a total of $3 bi lli on do llars to be spent, which wou ld have to have a spino ff that would take this province out of being a shirttail provi nce followi ng the Federal Gov ernment arou nd. I repeat, if that doesn't happen you'r e not going to have a very good economy.

You are ju st going to not be able to have the money that you spend. 1566 So, to really say that we have to do a lot more analyzing, I can buy that, but I say to the Min ister of Economic Developme nt, if you'r e going to be the leader, leading department on the economic devel opment of this provi nce, don't sit back and let the other Min isters tel l you that this is going to take a lot of time.

You go in there and tell them to get off their bu tts and get it done, because Manitoba at the present time is in a situation that if it's not done, your gov ernment or no other will do anything about it because that's the position we're in at the present time, and you will gi ve you r department the opportun ity to go out and work with people to say that Manitoba is growing. I refer to your Prospectus. It has been tabled in the House and I won't dwel l on it because the Min ister knows it has been dwelled on by the Leader of our party very long. This Prospectus says you are wor king

Friday, 16 April, 1982 on the potash; you are wor king on the Power Grid; you are wor king on Alcan. It giv es the impression to the people that loan you money that those things are going to happen and they obviously aren't happening. They are obviously slo wi ng down and if it slo ws down too long you won't pick it up in a year from now because Alcan has sai d, and I'm sur e In ternational Mi nerals and Chemic als will say, even though the markets down we can't wait too long because we have to increase our production to take care of the world markets that we esti mate will be there in the next 75 years.

If this govern ment wants to take those negotia tions, that have gone on before, lig htly, they're make a very grave mistake. They were not taken lig htly. Alcan has taken everybody from the Bal moral area that wants to go to see the plant. I personally have seen the plant; I know what's there and what can happen. Those of you who haven't seen the plant, if you stand on the front steps of this bu ilding and look down to The Bay, that's how long it is, and it's wider than this piece of prop erty, and it's clean and it's beautifu l.

In fact, I would sug gest to all of you here that if your Min ister asks Alcan to take you down to see it, go, because you'll know what they're planning to do with this provi nce. So, Madam Minis ter, I can only try to impress on you the importance of the devel opment of this prov ince and the importance of invest ment to this pro vi nce; the importance of having the type of investment that you have said you want, long term good invest ment that will in the end help you have the social programs that you want to have in this provi nce. Why don't you move ahead with it?

Why don't you move ahead with it, because it's possible? I firmly beli eve and Alcan has never said it, but I have dealt with them long enough that in my opinion if the negotia tions can be fini shed with Alcan, they will bu ild in Manitoba. The Gr ande Baie Plant came onstream last year. It took four years to bu ild. They started to bu ild it in 19 77. The plans to start bu ilding it were in 19 72.

They got sl owed down a li ttle bit because of the aluminum market, but they never never sto pped, but I never ever did say that they weren't going to build it, and if Al can says that we want to bu ild a plant in the Pro vinc e of Manitoba and we're prepared to take care of all the envir onment situa tions that come up, which i think are basically the most important; and if they want to be a renter in one of our power plants and they'll pay $600 milli on for that privile ge, let's stop fool ing around with it.

The people of Manit oba deserve to have that type of invest ment so they can be a people that have their own damn tax base that's good enough to be able to suppor t this provi nce without going on their hands and knees to the Federal Gov ernment every day. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRM AN: Madam Min ister. MRS . SMIT H: Mr. Chair person, I sympathize with the energy and obvious cari ng that the honou rable member shows for a project that I know he's invested a lot of his own time and interest in energy, and I do respect that honou rable member. I think, however, that you haven't heard the message that we are deliv ering.

I haven't heard any of us say, don't deal with Alcan. I think what we have said is giv e us time to make our own analysis so that when we come to negotia te a deal with Alcan, we will have a provinc ial framework from which to operate. We will know what we need to charge in over 35 years in order to get a good return. We won't be at the mercy, if you like, of the company's data. They're natur ally going to calcu late the maximum profit from their point of view. They wou ld be fool ish not to do so.

In a negotia ting rela tion ship each side should do that; start with their preferred position so that they get the maximum benefit from their point of view; Alcan to maxim ize profit, the Province of Manitoba to maxim ize the ben efits to the people. Then when they have their posi tions defi ned to themselves, they sit down and see what kind of a deal can be worked out. That is the stance that our govern ment is in.

We're not anti-Alcan; anti-development; anti-investment, but we inherited a set of data and approaches that were not coherent; that weren't thorough; that had some assump tions that we di sag reed with and it would have been ir responsible of us to buy them in our im patienc e to get an investment program that might not have been as beneficial as was bei ng presented.

On the ques tion of pricing or the ownership qu es tion, if I can try and keep these in order; the ques tion of the owner ship or not of a hydro dam, I think when the proj ect was ini tiall y presented the partial ownership concept was put forwar d . As the negotia tions or perhaps the publ ic response developed, I agree that the position was changed to a right for a period of time to the power developed by a dam rather than ownership, in exchange for which there would be input and the capital investment; so far not an impossible relationsh ip and one that we're still exa minin g qu ite sympathetical ly.

But the ques tion of price becomes fundamental here. Thirty five year s with inflation at the rate we're having it now, if you compound inflation at the rates we're having now and we don't know what's goi ng to happen over 35 years, if we enter into any kind of rate agreement with a com pany li ke Alcan without having carefully worked out the formula , we would be foolish. Now, you sug gest that rates were di scus sed , but we weren't satisfied with the formula that was being pro posed , because we did n't think it gave adequa te pro tection to the people.

We had been told from our British Colu mbia friends that they hadn't fou nd the 30-year agreement with Alcan that they had entered into had wo rked out to the publ ic benefit ; quite the opposite - they were in effect sel ling a very precious resou rce, hydro-electric ity at a bargain-base ment price that got more and more shameful, a low dispr o portionate as the years went by. No w, I supp ose harking back 30 years or more, we can't be too critical of the people who negotiated that agreement.

In flation was not occur ring at anything like the rate we have now and knowledge of the long term effects of some of these investments wasn't as great; the state of the art, if you lik e. We don't have that excuse. We know that some of these agreements have had long-term bad effects and we did n't want to in the interests of being responsible to the people of Mani toba, get out our selves into that kind of an agreement without taking time to plan. 15 67

Friday, 16 April, 1982 When we've talked about the changing interna tional situa ti on, I don't think we've ever said because the price has gone down today, Alcan doesn't want to bu ild. We know they need something like eight years lead time before they get a plant onstream and pro ducing, and they're doing the long term forecasting the same as we are. What it did do though was reduce the im media te urgency on Alcan's part to start up right away. That was fortuit ous from our point of view, because it meant that the time we needed to get our work done happened to match the Alcan situation too.

Now, publ icly they would say that they wanted to move ahead because they had a very good deal for them. But, they were not averse to stretching out the negotia tions longer because of the depressed world situa ti on. I think they, as an international company of great repute and skill and expertise, actually respect us as a responsi ble author ity who are willing to do our own analysis and then bargain from equal positions of strength. So, I submit that the policy we are taking on the Al can is the responsible position and a very hard headed position. We can't help but be nervous because of the history of CFI.

I know last night people said Saund ers Air craft, Ki ng Choy Foods and so on. Okay, we've had a history in this provi nce of some di ffi culties when we're dealing with outside investors or local investors or public investment. We want to learn from all of those mistakes and make sur e we don't repeat them. We know that in the CFI case, that in the eagerness to get big investors, rapid development, a bad deal was consumma ted; a really rotten deal for the people of Manitoba.

Now, we don't want to without pointing fi ngers as to who shared total responsibil ity, what we do want to do is say we're not going to, to the best of our knowledge anyway, repeat that kind of mistake and careful thorough planning is the one way that we have to prevent that ki nd of unwise deal. With regard to the location, I respect Alcan's need to have a rock base, but it doesn't take too much knowledge of the Province of Manitoba to know we have a heck of a lot of rock very widely disp ersed . Of course Alcan would want to go where the transporta tion costs and all are minim al.

I respect that, but we have a rig ht to look at the transportation routes and the rock locations as wel l as look at where the areas of employment are and make sur e that there might not be another location where we, by using some of our negotia ting strength, could manage to alter that loca tion without pushing Alcan into a situation where they'd have an uneconomic deal. They have qui te a wide range of viabi lity, if you like, in their negotia ting position. Certainly the long-term reliabi li ty of power source is more important than the absol ute lowest price.

So we have negotia ting room in terms of the price we charge and I think in terms of the location we wou ld be foolish not to take a fresh look at that. The honour able member said that his government chose, after encour aging Alcan and the local munici palitie s, to explor e all the possible sites and acted responsi bly. Well, from their perspective I think they did . I think that publ ic involvement was excellent, but I subm it when the final choice came down that the governme nt chose, for its own reasons, to play a neu tral role.

Now the fact that we are not committed to the 1568 neutr al role, I think it's a legitima te dif ference of opin ion. I think that's all we can say about it. You chose to be neutr al on lo cation, we choose to at least put it on the table. That's not saying that in the final analysis that we would dictate and say no deal unless you go up in the northwest corner of Manitoba. No, we' re jus t saying its one of the issue s we want to look at and see what kind of bargai ning room we have.

Envir onmental concerns: our contention was that if you'r e going to be serious about social and envir onmental concerns, you have to look at them before you make a decision about power and location. No t only do you have to have a full analysis, you have to involve the publ ic and admit outside groups with information to table. You can't rely only on Alcan information and I'm not saying that the previous gov ernment were only going to rely on Alc an govern ment, they had qu ite an extensive social -economic impact study outli ned and I' ve read it in detail.

I bas i cally lik e that, I think that if it was going to be an open process and if sufficient su pport was giv en to groups that perhaps wanted to make a presentation so that only the wel l-to-do groups were not in a position to make presentations, that process could have worked qu ite wel l and still, I think, will be put into place. But I submi t it was the sequence of decisions that was dis tu rbi ng us. If you've decided to go ahead, and maybe I'm misconstru ing what the policy of the pre vious government was, regardless of that our approach is that we have to resolve the environme ntal concerns fi rst.

Then if they're clear and we're satisfied that it's a benign type of development, then and only then do we go ah ead and make agreements on the other issues. I als o appreciate the almost desperate feeling that the honour able member has about dependency on this kind of investment, because in the approach to economic development that was domi nant in his gove rnment, and I think it sti ll is with his colleagues; it's that private investment is the main engi ne, if you li ke, or motor of ec onomic development.

We aren't denying that it's an important one, but we are saying it is not the only one; that there is also a kind of community-level-up style of economic develop ment assisting local entrepreneurs to expand and become modernized and to link up with what's already in the provi nce that in the cumula tiv e effect, each project taken alone can look small and insign ificant, but in the cumu lative effect of creating jobs, of replacing imports, of generating exports, can leave as much benefit to the provi nce as a big mega project.

Now we're not s ayi ng that large projects shouldn' t also be included, but what we want is the detaile d analysis in comparison, so that when we put publ ic money in or make deals with the publ ic reserves of the provi nce, we're doing it with the confiden ce that the maximum be nefit is accru ing to the people of Manitoba.

I think my final comment on the presentation is that speed of development, especially when we're deal ing with resou rces that are not in unlimi ted su pply, I know we tend to think of our hydro-electricity, because water is a renewable resou rce we tend to think of it as be ing in great supply and that somehow the faster we develop it the better. There are some advantages in developing it soon because instead of it running off to the sea we can get some benefit from it. There are also

Friday, 16 April, 1982 limi ts to our hydro-electric pot ential. There are going to be futu re needs we have for heat and development of our own kind of indus try here in the province and if we tie up too large a proportion of that too soo n, before we've done the long-term projections and comparisons, we can be acting ir responsi bly.

Now, it may be by the time we've completed our analysis we'll say the Alcan project or a project by another aluminum company, because it's not the only one in the world, there are other companies that are in the value-added end of the ind ustr y as well and can add jobs and value to the economy of the provinc e; that it will have an important role in the provincial economy.

As I said, because we are thinking long term and loo king at the full range of opportu nitie s there are possibi li ties of auto parts which will increas ingly be made out of aluminum, that this could be a reasonable location in Nor th American context for that kind of development. So far from being closed to these kind of large and im portant developments, I think we are very, very open to even a wider range of them, but we did not feel satisfied that all the essential components had been well enough researched and thought out that we felt confident in going ahead qu ickly. MR. JOHNSTON: Well I submit, Mr.

Chairman, that the components were thought out; I was part of them and maybe this govern ment doesn't think that the members of the previous govern ment had the brains to do it. I don't say that the Min ister is saying that, but there seems to be some indic ation that it was done slip shod.

It was done over a three-year period and if you'r e going to have the chicken and egg theory about the envir onment fi rst, sur e we can talk about the envir onment, but I assure you before you cou ld even look at it, Al can had to do many stud ies to see if it wou ld be viable to come to Manitoba as far as bri ng ing alumina to the centre of the cou ntry. Those studies were all done very extensively.

When you say that there are other places with rock forma tion, other than the north, they're not the easi est to find, and when they came to us with the six and we said let your board make a decision and they made the decision to go to Balm oral area; where in Manit oba, other than the north, is there more need for ind ustrial devel opment than the In terlake? The Federal Go v ernment recogn ized it with the ARDA Pr ogram.

There is no area in Manitoba, because if you take a look at Manitoba it has an angle from the corner up to Swan Ri ver which is agricultur al and that agricultur e does not sit wel l or does not - wel l, it's not a big agricultu ral area other than cattle.

The In terlake needs every thing that can be done for it and Teu lon, Stonewa ll, Sel kir k, all of those towns up through that area and those muni cipal ities - somebody was sup posed to say you made the wrong move by going there and you're going there because you want the transporta tion that is requir ed to have it econom ical , because the power line will be coming down very close to you . We were to say that it's a bad place to go, when it was probably one of the best places it could go as far as helping the economy in an area of the provi nce that has been recogn ized as needing it for years. Mr.

Chai rman, and I say to the Min ister, don't use up your resou rce too fast. But if any body has done any prelimi nary studie s on our hydro - in fact, there's a map, I used to have it on my wall in the office the Min ister now has, that showed there were 5,600 meg awatts of power in place in the Provi nce of Manitoba. It also showed in white the power plants that could go there. They don't have to be decided where they're going, that's been planned ages ago. We know, we don't have to do that. We know where they can go. Six thousand more megawatts.

That's close to 12 ,000 megawatts of power, and Edison, that suppl ies the whole New York and eastern sea board of the Un ited States, supplies about that much. Do you realize that we have the capacity to do that in Manit oba? All of the ind ustry and everything that's down there; we have that capacity on the Nelson. Alcan wants 400 megawatts in a power plant that would be owned by the people of Manitoba; 400, that's four percent of the power on the Nelson to have the investment they are speaking of and to put in the investment they are speaking of. Good deal for them?

What about the good deal for the people of Manit oba that will be wor king and having cottages at the lake and enjoying li fe because that's one of the things that will help them do it? They may be moving back, Madam Min ister, in their plans, but if you keep pushing them along, and I sin cerely hope that you don't have somebody start bi dding because they'll outbid one another to the point where profit will go to neither and nobody will have it. There comes a time when you say, we're not deal ing with three, we decided we're dealing with one.

I would be willin g to bet if the consu ltants that we hired to work on this - and there has been something stated about the fact that we used consu ltants - I assure you that with in this government there is not the expertise that some consultants have. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Order please. We have an option here. We can adjour n and return, or we can move that committee rise. There are 15 minutes left. MR. JOHNSTON: Maybe we can sort of let the bell ring for about 15 seconds and then move committee rise, and then I think the next time we come down, we can move off this item very fast.

The consu ltants - there is no expertise within the govern ment to giv e you the informati on you requir e to have, or that you say you requir e. We knew that and we got the experts from all over to advis e us. Tha t information is avai lable. The negotia tions with Alcan can come to a conclusion fairly quic kly if they're as amenable as I know they are and you know they are, so why not get it done? 1569 MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Comm ittee rise. SUPPLY - AG RICUL TURE MR. CHAIRMAN, Jerry T. Storie (Flin Flon): Com mit tee come to order please.

Is there any further debate on the proposed motion by the Honour able Member for Min nedosa, seconded by the Honou rable Member for Arthur ? The Honour able Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. J. WALLY McKEN ZIE (Roblin-Russell): Mr.

Friday, 16 April, 1982 Chai rman, I ju st would like to put a few words in the records in support of this motion that has been pres ented by my colle ague, the Member for Arthur. After listening here for the last two weeks to the Min ister go through the 42 or so million dollar spending Esti mates, I am most concerned about the manner in which the govern ment and the Minis ter and the Mini s ter of Co-op Develop ment have handled the plant closur es at Rossburn and Pilo t Mound. There is a clause in the resolution supporting my view on that opinion. I was somewhat concerned this morni ng, Mr. Chairman.

I would raise the matter if in fact si nce the employees at these plants had offered to take a reduc tion in pay to get the plants open that the Min ister of Agri cultur e or the Min ister of Co-op Development, to the best of my knowle dge, haven't seen fit to call MANCO or the Dair y Commis sion or these employees who in fact offered their servi ces, that they haven't taken the initiative to cal l them in and have them sit down ar ound a table and see if the plants can be opened. Spring is with us now.

The dair y producers in my constituency that serve the Rossburn Plant are most concerned as I stand here and I'm certain it must be the sames conditions apply at Pilo t Mound. There is a dairy ind ustry there that's been stable for decades and it sits today wonderi ng what the futu re holds for it in this province. Food products, food at its best, excel lent cattle, well-managed dair y farms and the crea meries are closed.

So, I don't think in su pporti ng this resolution and the reason I'm su pporting by the Member for Arthur, I don't think the govern ment has done half enough to go out and work with the people in Rossbu rn, the dairyman, the Manco people, resol ved the disp utes if any, but nevertheless sinc e the worker s have offered to take a reduction in salary and I think that's a very positiv e step, I am most concerned that li ttle or none has been done as I can understand it from going through the Estim ates to try and get those plants opened.

So I, very briefly and very qu ickly, will be supporting the resolution that was put before the Hous e last night that the Min ister's Sal ary be reduced to $50, the same as he's prepared to pay on a cow basis to the beef producers.

There are other facets of the resolution tha t other membe rs will deal with, but the one that I am most concerned for and I'm addressing this morning is the shoddy manner in which the Min is ter of Co-op Devel opment and the Department of Agricultur e and this Minis ter has flit tered the time away and those plants are sti ll sit ting there idle and I wonder now if they'll ever open agai n.

I have no assurance from anybody that - the concern I would thought that im mediately when the employees offered to take a reduction in pay at least of the Minis ters, the government would call them in and say, "Put it on the tabl e, let's see if we can make it work ." Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. So, therefore I will be supporting the motion that's presented in the Min ister's Salary by the Honour able Member for Arthur . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honour able Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chai rman, I regret not having been present yesterday when the motion was placed before the committee that deals with the Minis ter's Salary. I must say, Mr. Chai rman, that having personally based a simi lar motion of reduction in my case, it should be noted, it was down to 98 cents. The members of the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party at that time felt that my services were worth 98 cents in 19 66. I gue ss inflati on has intervened in the intervening years and what with the kind of annou ncements that we heard this morni ng, it's understandable that the reduction should be down to $50.00.

Of course, Mr. C hairman, I should not make light of it. There's a pointed message in the resolution, namely having to do with this Min ister's and this govern ment's resol u tion of the serious problem of the beef indus try, that particu lar fi gur e was contained in the resolution. Mr. Chai rman, I want to avail myself ju st in a few moments to speak to the Min ister's salary, as is the trad ition and practic e in the Hous e, to indic ate to the Honour able Min ister that he has chosen to embark on his career as Min ister of Agricultur e in the Provinc e of Manitoba in a very dubious way.

He bri ngs to of fice, Mr. Cha irman, certainly experience both in govern ment as a former Mini ster, experience in Cabinet, experience as an MLA for a number of years repres enti ng an agricultural community, an agricultur al constituen cy, which normally should aug ur wel l for the Min ister in his important role of the Min istry of Agricu ltur e. 1570 Mr. Chai rman, I would hope that the Min ister would take cognizance of the fact that the agricultur al com munity, particula rly in Manitoba, is a very div erse one.

One only has to look at the numbers of organizations that represent farm interests in Manitoba. They have chosen of their own accord, Mr. Chai rman, to organ ize themselves under the broad and all-encompassing organiz ation known as the Manitoba Farm Bur eau. The Manitoba Farm Bur eau does speak, not with a single voi ce, but it does encompass to the extent possible the farm interest, agricultur al interest in the Provin ce of Manit oba.

Whether they are growers of liv estock; whether they are growers of specialty crops and of course the main organiza tions , the grain pro ducer organizations as well, are all represented in the farm organ ization known as the Manitoba Farm Bur eau .

I am di sappoi nted in the Min ister of Agricul tur e for not taking cog nizance of that and by allowing himself repeatedly, as is the case in the matter of appoi ntments to farm boards, to what I can only des cribe as an undue bi as, an undue prejudic e, in favour of one farm organization that happens to be more philo sophic ally in tune with the thoug hts of the Hon our able Min ister and of the New Democratic Party. I don't see anything particu larly wrong with it. The National Farmers' Union is essential ly the rural wing of the New Democratic Par ty, both provincially and nati onally.

That has been the case in the past and contin ues to be the case and there's nothing wrong with that, Mr. Chairman. But , Mr. Chai rman, the National Farmer s' Un ion, for whatever reasons, represents a very small minority of farm interests in this provi nce and in the country as a whole. I susp ect that in this province, the actual fig ure is in the neigh bo ur hood of between 3 and 5 percent and I think I'm being reasonably accu rate in making that statement.

Friday, 16 April, 1982 If we talk about a membership of 800 to 1, 000, what ever it is in the Prov ince of Manitoba, then we're tal k ing out of a body of some 30, 000 active farmers, a percentage fi gur e of 3 to 5 percent that the Farmers' Union group represents. So, Mr.

Chairman, the Min ister should not take offence when we find that on vari ous agric ultur al boards two or three out of five of the broad area of interested and responsible people that he can find to staff the vari ous boards, that it seems invariably that the Nati onal Farmer s' Union occupie s a promi nent place in the placement of these boards. Wel l, Mr.

Chairman, that's the Minis ter's choice, but the Mini s ter of Agric ul tur e will soon find out as he carries on in his career that it is abso lutely essential for a Min ister of Agricultur e in the Provinc e of Manit oba to talk to, to at least lis ten to if not always accept advice from, the broader secto r of the farm communi ty. Both in the manner and way in which the beef plan was put together; both in the manner and way in which the Min ister is choosing his farm appoi ntments; both in the manner and way in which the Min ister is speaking in this Chamber ind icate that is not happening. Mr.

Chairman, farmers in the Pro vi nce of Manitoba have tradit i onally looked upon their Min ister of Agri cultur e in a very proprietary way. There is a very close relationsh ip between the indi vidual farmers, the farm communi ty and the Min istry of Agricultur e. I sugge st even more so than in some of the other departments. I sup pose you can say that about all departments to some extent.

You can say the same thing about the Department of Health and the various health compo nents, but I sugge st to you not in the same way per haps because the problems are dif ferent or perhaps ju st because of the natur e of the people, but the farm communi ty has always looked at the Minis try of Ag ri cultur e as being very much their Minis try of Agricul tur e whether it's a job that the home economists do or the 4-H leader s do with the farm childr en, with the rural youth of Manitoba, in su pporti ng their vari ous unde rtakings; whether it's the job and the role of the exte nsion branch and the role of the extension repre sentative in the help that it does far and beyond ju st the immediate agrologis t's advice that is being gi ven from time to time to individual farmers or to communi ties, but ju st his presence, his being in a community, has always identifie d the Min istry of Agricult1 1r e in what I call a more perso nal way, and the farmers have responded in a more possessive way about their feel ings about the Min istry of Agricultur e and the Min ister of Agricultur e.

I sense that the Min ister of Agricultur e under the present administration do es not acknowl edge or does not appreciate that sense to the extent that I think he could, the exte nt that it would be extre mely helpful to him in carrying out his responsi bili ties as Min ister of Agr icultur e. Mr. Chai rman, he does so at his own risk and at the risk and expense of his party by taking that position. Your problems associated with agricultur e are such that usually, in all too many cases, are above and beyond the partisan problems or issues raised by politicians involved.

The farmer to a greater exte nt than anybody else is subject to envir onmental factors, to the weather.

The farmer in Manit oba to a greater exte nt than anybody else is sub je ct in terms of his immediate return, his income, to worldwide interna- tional factors that can determ ine his share of the eco nomic pie, if you want to describe it in such a way; much more so than the average ind ustrial worker who can be affected overnigh t by a statement as was made by the Min ister of Labour ju st this morning in this Chamber, which guar antees to those lucky with a job -t here maybe fewer of them - but certainly to those that are currently working on the minimum wage, they have jus t been noticeably affected by about 14 per cent by a simple action by a sim ple statement made in this Chamber by an action taken by this government.

At the same time that those kind of actions can be taken and can affect other worker s and persons employed in our provi nce cannot be applied to the farm community. The farm communi ty li stens with bated breath every time the Wheat Board annou nces ini tial prices and they can be 1 O percent or 15 percent lower than last year's despite the fact that all their cost, their implements are up. The Min ister of Agricul tur e knows all this. The hog producer, the beef pro duc er, can from year to year see prices rise and fluc tuate that have a very sign ific ant effect on his income. So, Mr.

Chairman, for that reason the farm communi ty takes a li ttle dif ferent attitude towards their politi cians, their Min ister of Agricu ltur e and I have sensed in this particular Min ister of Agricultur e a fai lur e to respond to that position that has historical ly and tra ditionally been the case in Manitoba. Mr. Chairman, I don't take the action ligh tly of vot ing to reduce a Min ister's Salar y at any ti me.

I think anybody that has had the opportun ity of serving the people of Manit oba in that capacity would have to say that because I'm prepared to acknowledge that in most ins tances the effort, the workload, the responsi bil itie s are such that the normal renumeration that is set aside for a Min ister, you know, should be passed without too much dif ficu lty. But when a Minis ter such as the one we have today has in this, his fi rst presenta tion of Esti mates, raised as many questions in the minds of so many dif ferent people involved in the farming communi ty we have no alternative, Mr.

Chairman, but to use this traditional method, show our disple asure at this Min ister and hope to try to get through to the Min ister that some of his utterances - he may wish to take them as being out of context or not bei ng fully understood - but he can never con vinc e me as the one who perhaps precipi tated the last little outbur st and controversy with respect to land ownership about what his true thoug hts and positions were on the matter. It was in a discussion that I under took with him and I didn' t charge him with anything, Mr. Chairman.

I sim ply raised the qu estion about the relativ ity between land ownership and productivit y. It was the Minis ter, admitted ly from his seat and there fore not recorded in Hans ard, but I recorded it several ti mes, the Min ister chose not to correct it. As I say, I wasn't here yesterday so maybe that record has been corrected. -(I nterjectio n)- Well, okay, Mr. Chair man, I'm pleased that in my absence that has come firmly on the record. 1571 "What does ownership have to do with the provision of food?" says the Min ister of Agricultur e. Mr.

Chair man, I supp ose and you see what really grie ves me is I sinc erely bel ieve that the Min ister was sincere and believes that in asking that question. That's what exercised my leader, that's what exercised my col-

Friday, 16 April, 1982 leagues. If the Min ister on such a fundamental issue does not have an understanding of the sign ificance of that que stion or of that position then, Mr. Chairman, we are indeed in trouble. Because it will obviously and it has already influe nced a whole host of decisions that he is cu rrently responsible for.

Decisions that had to do with how the Manitoba Agricultur al Credit Corpor ation handles its $30, $40 mil lion doll ars of funds; how di sposition of land is administered under his ministry; how programs are developed selectively with bias and with prejud ice agai nst those who are leaseholde rs, those who are tenants of the state, those who are tenants, those who are serfs to the govern ment of the day as compared to those freehold lando wners. I have to use these medie val terms, Mr. Chairman, to impart the sign ificance of this state ment. No w, Mr.

Chairman, I'm really, fi rst of all, su rprised I suppose is the simp lest most under standable term that I can use, that the Min ister would allow himself to make that kind of a statement. I' ve always believed that of him but tha t we would make that kind of a state ment and not understand its sign if icance because, of cou rse, what it does, Mr.

Chair man, is add and lend a great deal more legitima cy to some of the charges that the Opposition will make and is going to conti nue making which might have been described earl ier and perhaps in past years and being not qui te fair or as being an exaggeration of their intentions. Mr. Chairman, I'll acknowledge that is a position that from time to time, you know, honourable members opposite may choose to take when we get exercised about these matters. But, Mr.

Chair man, with such a clear state ment on the record and it's on the record, and I'm gl ad to see that it's on the record, what does ownership have to do with the production of food? Mr. Chairman, that adds and will add legiti macy to the position of the Conser vative Party with respect to farmland ownership over the next four years which we will not allow this New Democratic Par ty adminis tra tion to forget. We will be able to, we will su bstantiate those charges and those concerns throughout the ridings, througho ut the greater constituency of Mani toba. Now, Mr.

Chai rman, I believe that his colleagues and his government will come to understand why the resolution before us and the hurt, the damage, that this new Min ister of Agricultur e, experien ced as he is, has done to his government and his party's cause in the Provinc e of Manitoba. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honour able Member for Morris. MR. MANNESS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also have to rise to speak to this motion by the former Min ister of Agricultur e. I'm not going to rehash many of the areas in detail as the Member for Pembina and Arthur did that most capably last night.

However, I, too would lik e to expand in one particular area and that is this lo fty position of the Min ister of Agricultur e and to the exte nt it's held in such high esteem by the farm com muni ty and as such should be taken very, very seriously.

I'm concerned , I su ppose, in li stening to many of these areas and the comments of the Min ister on many issue s, I'm concerned as to the Min ister's total comprehension and his whole understanding of spe- 1572 cific areas and how they fit into the whole and I am concerned about some basic philosophy that he seems to hold close to his being which doesn't seem to fall specif ically one way or the other.

It allows him, I gu ess, great leeway and if there's anything the farm communi ty needs, they need an indi vid ual who will speak forthright and who will put thi ngs on the record that are su bject to, not varying

interpretations, but to one

interpretation. My main concerns fall into these areas which I'll li st briefly.

Fi rst of all, into the whole Marketing Board area, I have a strong believing that this Min ister does not understand all the issues and I'm concerned as I' ve come to know many of the Marketi ng Boards quite clo sely and as I see us moving into a new age within their whole sphere of activity, I think it is time that the Department of Agricultur e and specific ally the Min ister of the day, attempt now to review that whole area, not to do away with the concept, but to attempt to again redefi ne maybe some of the areas of respo nsibili ty that have been gi ven to some of the boards.

Agai n, I'm not saying restrict them, but we are on an evol utionar y process and it's important that this whole concept, the concept of supply management, the concept of Com mission Boards which have benefit in their own right to a large number of produ cers be reassessed and be redefine d in this particular time. I don't see it yet where this new Min ister is prepared to acknowledge that should be done.

The beef program, wel l there's a tremendous con cern here, because I think promises have been made to a large number of people that consu ltation would be the name of the game of this government and of this whole Min ister and it has not been displa yed or demonstrated here in this particu lar develop ment of a beef progr am in any shape or form .

I find that it's an il l-conceived program and I really wonder when the annou ncement comes forwar d that producers can be expected to make 4 to 8 percent premium contri bu tions for their contri bution into the stabil ization pro gram and I say, how can the Min ister stand up in front of us and tell us that 8 percent of the revenue from the sale of an animal should be di rected towards the pre mium contri bution into the stabil ization fund. It may be that it ends up that. Maybe that's what the plan will need to be viable. I don't know, but I am also sayi ng, I don't have to know; the Min ister does.

The Minis ter has to be more prepared when he comes forwar d with a prog ram lik e that because 8 percent or 10 percent of the val ue represents vir tuall y all that was in that for that particular farmer. We move to the In terest Rate Relief Program and we see all the comments and we hear all the comments that have been made on that particular project and our fi rst intu ition of cou rse when we were giv en the details on it, the scant details, were that in fact it would be of li ttle value. Who would be able to gai n access to that type of program?

Our fears of course, I think , have been expanded si nce that time when we tal ked to people who have applied and particula rly si nce we've read the

article released by the Farm Bu reau who indic ate that in their analysis, in fact very, very few people will qu alify. We can move into the dair y ind ustry and I know the Member for Robli n-Russel l who's seen a cheese plant close down with i

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-35
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 35.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	b7e7fd8111b30a4a779a24272834c0db1454b57e

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