Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 57A (31st Legislature, 5th Session)

31-5-57a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 13 April, 1981 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (B irtle Russell): The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. HOWARD PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, WHE REAS the former Chairman of Manitoba Hydro, Dean Martin We depohl, has ack no wledged the authenticity of the legal opinion prepared for Manitoba Hydro, presented to the House on April 10 by the Honourable Member for St. Vital ... MR. SPEAKER : Order. Order pl ease.

The honourable member is making reference to a document which the Chair took under advisement and as yet has not made any ruling on. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the motion is not affected by the fact that you did not permit the tabling of the particular document in question. I'm not attempting to table that document, Mr. Speaker, I'm making reference to a document which I have in my possessio n. I'm not requesting the tabling of that document within my motion. I'm dealing with references to a legal opinion and, Mr .

Speaker, I'm dealing with a matter of privilege, not with the matter per taining to the tabling of any particular document. MR. SPEAK ER: Order. Or der pl ease. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition made reference to a document that was brought before this Chamber on Frida y and I have not as yet rendered any decision to the House on tha t matter. I would respec tfully request that members of the Chamber not make reference to that until the Chair has had the opportunity of rendering a decision. Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions ... The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR.

PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, it's our intention to make some amendments then in the motion which we have before us and to present that motion, a privilege. MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . . Mi nisterial Statements and Tabling of Reports . . . Notices of Mo tion Introduction of Bills ... INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. SPEAKER: At this time I would like to bring to the honourable members' attention the Roseau High School Choir from Minn esota under the direction of Mr. Stan Kludzerski.

We also have 29 students of Grade 5 standing from the Harold Hatcher School under the direction of Mi ss June Stoyko. This school is in the constituenc y of the Hono urable Memb er for Transcona. 2679 On behalf of all the honourable members we welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Sp eaker, to th e Mini ster responsible for Manitoba Hydro. Can the Min ister advise whether he has in his possession any legal opinion presented to the Board of Manitoba Hydro or to himself written by one Mr. Steward Martin? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Energy. HON. DONALD W. CRAIK (Riel): No, Mr. Speaker, I do not. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, a question to the First Mini ster. Can the First Minister advise the Chamber when he was first advised of the matter pertai ning to legal advice having been given by one Mr. Steward Martin to the Board of Manitoba Hydro, which legal advice was later related to his Deputy Premier? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. STERLING R. LYON (Ch arleswood): No I can't, Mr. Speaker. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, on Thursday the First Mini ster ind icated that he had received information from his Deputy Premier pertai ning to the receipt of the legal opinion. Was his reference on Thursday to the receipt of legal opinion on Thursday or had he indeed received information prior to Thursday of the legal opinion that had been presented to the Board of Manitoba Hydro by one Steward Martin? MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I have no recollection of saying what my honourable friend alleges I said even on Thursday, let alone knowing of a legal opinion, a copy of which the Deputy Premier of the province does not have. MR.

SPEAKER: The Hono urable Memb er for Transcona. MR. WILSON PARASIUK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is dir ected to the Minister of Health. On Friday after investigating the disposal of drugs and medicines from a medical centre in Transcona through open garbage cans through which school children had rifled through these garbage cans, the Mini ster indi cated that after his investigation he confirms that there are no provincial regulations in place regarding the safe disposal of unwanted drugs and medicines by doctors.

Can the Minister ind icate whether, in fact, he is going to immediately issue instructions as to how these unwanted drugs and medicines will be disposed of safely? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. L.R. (Bud) SHER MAN (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, I can do and will do, if it's necessary. I've

Monday, 13 April, 1981 had discll_ssions with the College of Physicians & Sur geons on the sub ject . The y'r e intending to circulate that kind of reminder to their membership thr ougho ut the provi nce in a special newsletter mailing. MR.

PARASIUK: Is the Mini ster satisfie d th at present unwanted drugs and medicines are being di sposed of in such a way that school childr en couldn't get access to them through garbage cans from hospitals, from nur sing homes, from guest homes, from pharmacies or any other such facilities that would have these types of drugs or medicines which could, in fact, be harmful to children? MR. SHERMAN: Well, I'm satisfie d with the pr oced ures that are in pl ace in the main, Mr . Speaker.

The Standa rds Division of the Health Services Commission for example, mon itor s the disposal of such medications from hospitals and other health facilities, but certainly the point that's been identified and underscored as a result of the incident in Transcona is one that concerns me. It may well be that a firmer kind of action, certainly a firm reminder, is necessary and called for among medical groups and individual doctor's offices. I would like to say, while I'm on my feet, Mr.

Speaker, that I think the Regent Park School acted in a highly responsible manner in bringing the matter to the attention of the Legislature through the MLA for that constituency, and in notifying all the parents in the area of what had taken place. I want to thank the school officials and the admin istration for doing that. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Mem ber for Transcona with a f1nal supplementary. MR. PARASIUK: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I'd just like to add that it was also the doctors of the Transcona Medical Centre who acted in a cautious way in the first place and the correct manner, by informing the pol ice and the school division of this emergency situation.

In view of the fact that the Min ister does not have a set of regulations in place, will he be prepared right now to issue a governmental directive, without having to rely on a go-between, namely the College of Physicians & Surgeons, but rather will he issue a directive on behalf of the Government of Manitoba to hospitals, to personal care homes, to guest homes, to pharmacies, to other facilities that will have on their premises prescription drugs and medicines that may in fact, now be unwanted and may in fact, be disposed of in a way that would not guarantee the safety of school children? MR.

SHERMAN: It's not just school childr en that are in volved , ·· Mr. Sp eaker. The medical profess ionn under its··oath and under its licensing procedures assumes the respo nsibil ity for not putting any person at risk without the permission of that pers on. Obviously there are some medical procedures which involve risk, but without the permission of the person they shall not and will not put any person at risk. So, we're talking about the population in general, not just school children. 1 believe that the medical profession polices itself very well in that respect.

There has been obviously a 2680 very unfortunate and deplorable incident that has occurred in Transcona and I'm looking at it very intensively and in discussion with the college on the subject, and I'll take whatever action is necessary. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Member for Elmwood. MR. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to dir ect a question to the First Minister concerning this blue pamphlet on Constitutional Issues which is going to be mailed to everybody in Manitoba at taxpayers expense. I want to ask the Premier if he could be specific as to the procedure or principle followed.

It would seem normal to advertise certain government programs that need to be drawn to the public's attention but this seems to be simply a policy or attitude of the Provincial Government and I ask the Min ister on what basis he decided to spend money to send this to every home in the province, especially in view of the fact that he was very critical of the Prime Mini ster for general advertising programs unde rtaken by his government? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. MR. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, the Member for Elmwood, I'm sure, will remain unpersuaded after I've said at my most persuasive why the people of Manitoba along with the people of most other provinces in Canada should receive from their government some statement about how the government stands witt respect to the constitutional issue that is before th, people of Canada at the present time, and for that I make no apology whatsoever.

The Go vernment of Man itoba will send out pamphlets or information on this with respect to our stand on this topic provided we are satisfied that it is in the public int erest and I can only say to my honourable friend that what we have done in terms of this pamphlet is small by comparison to what many other provinces in Canada have done in terms of province-wide circulation of their residents, of their taxpayers, of their citizens, in order to enable them to know the position that now eight out of 10 Canadian provinces are taking in opposition to a uni laterally imposed constitutional proposal which is before the Parliament of Canada.

Mr. Sp eaker, ob viou sly we did not seek the opinion of the Member for Elmwood before we initia ted along with five other provinces, court action. We did not seek his opinion before we sent out this pamphlet, nor do we intend to. MR. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, did the First Mi nister consider having the pamphlet printed by the Queen 's Printer? MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I can't comment on the detail of who printed it. It was given to the usual authorities in government to look after, a01d they looked after it.

If my honourable friend is so engaged by this topic and wishes to find out the name of the printer, how many copies were printed, let him file an Order for Return and we'll give him the information. I don't know. MR. SPEAK ER: The Hono urable Mem ber for Elmwood with a final supplementary.

Monday, 13 April, 1i>81 MR. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I assume, and I ask the First Mi nister this question, I assume that he regards this as a policy of the Province of Manitoba as opposed to the Progressive Conservative party itself, therefore I would ask him whether he would extend the same privile ge to the Mem bers of the Official Opposition to present their views, as opposed to their capacity as the New Democratic Party of Mani toba.

If it's all right for the go vernment to present its vie ws to the people of Manitoba at taxpayers' expense, would it not be logical and fair to allow the official opposition to do the same? MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I'm subject to correction on this because I don't have the detailed information. But in most provinc es to the west of us the Opposition is supporting the government of the day with respect to the position that they are taking.

Regrettably that is not the position of the Official Opposition in this House, and for that they must answer to their own consciences, and eventually to the electorate of Manitoba. But I can merely say to my honourable friend - and I'll be as facetious in my response as he was in the question - that in order to print the response of the New Democratic Party, one would have to turn out 20 pamphlets, because they don't have one position. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. ,>MS . JUNE WESTBURY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Honourable Mini ster of Energy and Mi nes.

Would the Min ister tell the House if the government is involved or has been involv ed in any discussions with Hudson's Bay Min ing & Smelting, IN CO, Dynamic Min ing or any other party regard ing possible development of the area around Bird River? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, there is inte rest in that general area with regard to chromite deposits. I can't confirm that the department has had direct dealings with the firms mentioned. I can only ind icate that there is activity. It's quite possible that the firms mentioned could have some dealings with the Mineral Resources Branch. MS. WESTBURY: Mr .

Speaker, reports indi cate a breakthrough in the metallurgic procedure by the Ontario Research Council. Can the government tell us whether there was a meeting of officials including officials of his department or any other department of this government, the government of Ontario and the mining indu stry officials held in Ottawa last month concerning this process and can the Min ister confirm that the metallurgic procedure referred to is in an advanced state of development? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, it's quite possible that there were officials from the department involved in such a meeting.

I have heard tha t the Ontario Research Foundation has developed a process which is amenable to the commercial production of chrome from those deposits and that it looks encouraging and that there are mining companie s who are in terested . I believe perhaps at least one or perhaps two or maybe all of the minin g companies recited by the Member for Fort Rouge are involv ed at looking 2681 at the use of the process. Beyond that, Mr. Speaker, until there is an announ cement I presume from any of the inter ested parties, there will not be further details available. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Fort Rouge with a final supplementary. MS. WESTBURY: Mr. Speaker, I think I understood the Minis ter to say it is possible that members of his department were involved in such discussions. When will he know, when can we get an ans wer to the question? In view of the fact that chromite is a rare strategic metal not easily available in the western world, will the Min ister tell us whether there has been any in terest shown by the United States government or any private Un ited States firms in the project? MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, I'll take the question as notice with regard to the attendance at any meetings of personnel from the department. With regard to the second part of the question, if interest were shown by companies mentioned from the U.S. it may well have been to private mineral right holders in that area. It may not be possible to answer it but I can enquire as to whether there have been any dealings with the department that could be related to the member at this time. MR. SPEAKER : The Hono urable Member for Rossmere. MR. VIC SCHROEDER: Mr . Speaker, I have a question for the Minis ter in charge of Hydro.

Could he tell us when Mr . Wedepohl told him of the legal opinion of Mr. Martin, that the Tritschler Commission was acting outside of the rules of natural justice? Could he tell us whether he then aske d Mr . Wedepohl for the written legal opinion in order that he could have his own department and his legal staff determ ine whether in fact there was a serious problem with respect to that commission? MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, I want to indic ate to the member, and if he had been in attendance at the committee meetings last week he would have heard the reply to that question, and that is that this alleged legal opinion which has not yet been verified as a so-called legal opinion, is still somewhat in the air, Mr. Speaker, I presume. I want to say again, as I repeated last week, Mr.

Speaker, and I, in my opinion, repeat it without any contradiction, although I seem to have some difficulty getting that point across to some of the members and in fact to at least one of the media that, without contrad ict ion, I was add ressed by the former Chairman of Mani toba Hydro at the time of the departure of the legal counsel and as I ind icated to the House and ind icated to the committee, that he reported to me a number of the gr ievances that were raised by the former legal counsel.

He reported to me also that he was in a state of some disturbance over the progress that was being made in his grievanc es with the Tritschler Inquir y Commission and included any number of topics that he felt were important at the time. Now, the member asked a question, I think, as to whether I was provided with a -(I nterject ion)- Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member, as I've said before, 1

Monday, 13 April, 1981 was n t provided with any legal opinion; the Hydro Board Fepbrted to the committee that it did not request and did not receive a legal opinion. What I was provided with was a report froffi the former Chairman of Manitoba Hydro that said that things had come to a point in their work with that legal counsel

whereas things had become difficult, that the 'legal counsel was disturbed about matters. He had a num ber of gr ievances; those gr ievances were repdrted ttl me, Mr. Speaker, that is some two years ago and that's as far as the matter went; that's the first and last I heard of it until about two or three days ago here. MR. SPEAK ER : The Ho nourable Mem ber for Ross mere. MR. StHROEDER: Thank you, Mr . Speaker, the questidn was whether in fact he asked for that opinion but further, did the Minis ter then contact Mr .

Martin to have that particular opinion explained to him so that he could und erstand what exactly the concern was, in view of the fact that the Mini ster ag reed several da ys ago that he was de cide ly unent husiastic about the specific legal advice given by Mr. Martin? Did he contact Mr . Martin in order that he could unde rstand the legal advice given, or was he just playing barracks-room lawyer? MR. CRAIK: Well, I'll repeat, Mr. Speaker, again what I said last week and that is that the legal counsel, Mr.

Martin, was retained by Manitoba Hydro without consultation with me; he worked with them during the period of his repres enting them and his release from them came without consultation with me as with regard to any part of his cont ract with them. Why then, in that case, should I, at that point in time, ask them for anything that I had not ever been a part of before or after? So, Mr. Speaker, to repeat again, the legal counsel ·was to the Crown corporation, it was not to me as the Minister. MR. SPEAKER : The Ho nourable Memb er for Rossmere with a final supplementary. MR. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, the Min ister forgets about the fact that in the middle of those commission hearings he fired the Chairman of Hydro; he forgets about the fact that he set up the hearings, that his government set up the hearings. Now he is saying to us that he has nothing to do with it. MR. SPEAKER: Order, order, order please. I find it rather difficult to hear the words of the Honourable Member for Rossmere. The Honourable Member for Rossmere. MR. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, I was saying Ilia! the Min ister suddenly is backing off into a corner very much and preten ding he didn't know anything about what was going bn. The question is, did the Min ister obtain a further opinion from another lawyer because he had been told, he had been told by the Acting Chairman of Hydro, that there was a lawyer whom the First Minister places great trust in, who said that there was something wrong, that there was a denial of natural justice, that's what he had been told .

Surely the Minister in 2682 charge of Hydro must have been concerned enough based on that opinion, to consult another lawyer before simply dismissing the advice. So, I'm asking, did he consult another lawyer, on what basis did he simply dismiss these concerns that were expressed by Mr . Martin? MR. CRAIK: Mr. SpeaiU!r, I find it hard to believe that the Member for R6ssmere, who I think is a lawyer himself, would ask such a question.

He knows very well, to tell him again, that the legal counsel was one that was retained by Hydro, he reported to Hydro and all his dealings were with Hydro and the Hydro Board made the final severance with him at some point in January of 19 79.

My understanding is that the firm of Aikins, MacAuley and Company were the lawyers for Manitoba Hydro beginning in about 1971 right through the 19 70s, that particular person came on as the legal counsel for them and during the Tritschler heari ngs; there were two other members of that firm who were also the legal counsels at the same time, through it and after, and they were at all times the legal counsel to the Hydro. I can tell the member if he has any interest, and I'm not sure he has, but I have never met with any one of those three representatives that were working with Manitoba Hydro.

I had nothing to do with their hiring and nothing to do with their release, nothing i o Clo with their proce edings, any interim report, final report, ini tial report, or anything else; they were counsels to the utility, Manitoba Hydro. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Winn ipeg Centre. MR. J.R. (Bud) BOYCE: Mr. Speaker, further to the question by the Member for Elmwood.

I looked at the pamphl et which is goin g out; since the commitment has been made I imagine they are printed and the government is committed to sending them out at a total cost of some $32,000, I wonder if the First Mini ster is willing !o negotiate that if he provides them to the Progressive party we would be willing to print, at our expense, the cost of the Progr essive party vis-a-vis the Constitution which would not differ that much from what is on the front page; that we find this to be a waste of space and we wonder if the First Minister would be inter ested in negotiating with us that we would actually print on the back of this our position; equal space I think would be ...

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Mini ster. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, the Progressive party, if I can believe it, at least has one common position on the Constitution, which is unlike the New Democratic party in Manitoba. To that extent I am intrigued, but beyond that, Mr. Speaker, I would have to answer jovially, but seriously at the same time, no, we couldn't do that.

As a matter of inter est I was asking why the back of the pamphlet was blank and, when I heard the answer it was self-apparent, that it was thought that in schools and other places they would like to pin the pamphlet up on a board or a wall so that people could read the one side of it; it is very simple. Now, if my honourable friend is suggesting that probably if his were printed on the other side they would turn it over and print the Progressive side of the story,

Monday, 13 April, 1981 which wouldn't be far from the government side in any case because the Leader of the Progressive party has ind icated that he supports the position that the go vernment of Mani toba is taking on the constitutional matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns. MR. SAUL CHERNIACK: Mr. Speaker, referring to the que stions of the Honour able Member for Rossmere to the Honourable Min ister reporting for hydro.

Considering the problem that has been created from the fact that there are unans wered questions, a problem created in the minds of many Manitobans about the unanswered questions that have been raised here during this last week, Mr . Speaker, I gather that you are considering a problem dealing with a certain document.

Ma y I ask the Honourable Mini ster whether he is prepared to assist the clarification for the people of Manitoba, of the question of whether or not legal opinions were given and the nature of them, whether as the Mi nister reporting for Hydro he is prepared to discuss with the political side of Hydro - that is the Chairman of Hydro - the advisability and recommend to Hydro that they should release their previous counsel, enabling him to speak out if he wishes to, on the question of his opinion given to Hydro and on the quest ion of his reasons for resi gna tion or withdrawing from the case, leaving it to him - not as an instruction but rather the right being granted to him - to be able to respond publicly on the questions that have been raised during this last week and which, Mr.

Speaker, I repeat are in the minds of the people of Manitoba and remain unans wered? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I think that perhaps with this so-called document and it seems to be up in some question yet, that it may require for Hydro's purposes itself if it's going to cast a shadow on them, for them to consider. The position taken at the committee by the utility was that if there was a request from the lawyer in this case to apply to the Hydro Board for a release from the traditional client-solicitor relationship, that he would take it to the board and they would give it considera tion. I would think, Mr.

Speaker, it would be highly recommended if in fact this piece of paper tha t 's float ing around is an opinion that was rendered - whether it's called a legal opinion or whatever it is - if it came from one of their lawyers perhaps that legal firm might want to clarify it. I would think that Hydro ought to give consideration actually to requesting that clarification be wide open if they wish to do so. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr .

Speaker, if I inter pret the Minister correctly, I gather that he is now saying that he believes that Hydro ought to enable the law firm to clarify for the public the position they've been taking, the recommendation that has been made and I would ther efore request the Min ister to so inform Hydro. Will he consider informing Hydro that he thinks they ought to make it possible for the law firm to be able to make a pu blic position known in this connection and not have to wait for the possibility that the lawyer is so in censed and exercised about 2683 what has been attributed to him, as to ask Hydro for a release?

Is it not more important for the people of Manitoba to know the truth than to wait for a lawyer to become so exercised that he has to ask that he be released from the confidentiality of the solicitor client relationship?

So I'm asking the Mi ni ster, is he prepared to recommend to the board to make the unila teral statement public that it will not stand in the way of the lawyer referred to, making public the position that he took with regard to his employer considering that in fact all of the assets in the entire operation of Manitoba Hydro belongs to the people of Manitoba, who are subsidizing it in taxation, who are paying for it in their Hydro rates, and who are most in terested and have a right to be inter ested in the expenditure of moneys by Hydro? MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, I think first of all it has to be noted that if there were a legal opinion that ought to have been aired it certainly ought to have been two years ago and not now. But notwithstanding that, Mr. Speaker, I'm not going to be put in the position of telling the utility what it ought to do. I've taken the position all along that they have engaged their own legal counsel. I have not inte rfered at any stage of the game with the legal advice they've got, Mr. Speaker. I've been apprised, Mr. Speaker, of the difficulties they had at one stage in the dealings with their legal counsel and I've always said that.

But, Mr. Speaker, I do think that I've answered that again last week. I said, if Hydro took that position I certainly would have no objection to it - that was the position that if upon request they would do it - Mr. Speaker, if the Hydro Board decided they wanted to take the in itiative on it I would completely endorse them taking that in itiative. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns with a final supplementary. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, now that we have it clear th at the Mini ster would endo rse Hydro's decision if it made the decision to release the solicitor without waiting for his request so to do; and since the Minis ter does not want to interfere with Hydro affairs except that he has on his own occasion fired the Chairman and General Manager and has appointed two subsequent people; whether he is not prepared now to make it clear to the people of Manitoba that it would be to the advantage of the people and in the inte rests of this government to invite and advise Hydro, not instruct them, but to advise them that they should indeed make that release uni laterally so that the matter could be cleared in your interest, Mr .

Speaker, and that of the people of Manitoba. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I first of all want to clarify something again that I know isn't required, at least I assume it's not required for a former member of the Cabinet in Manitoba, that the Chairmanship of Hydro is an Order-in-Council appointment and that is the full responsi bility of government. He seems to be trying to lay down another question mark and smoke -screen with regard to the change in the Chairmanship of Hydro in early 19 79. That was the full resp onsibility of the government, the action and initia tive of the Min ister and that was taken, Mr. Speaker.

This other that we're talking about is not.

Monday, 13 April, 1981 So, Mr. Speaker, to repeat again as I said last week and I repeat again this week, if Hydro wants to take action on its own, take the initia tive, wait for a request, that is their business. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, further to the Minis ter, will the Mini ter then advise Manitoba Hydro that he would prefer to see them release the former Chief Legal Counsel, Steward Martin, from solicitor-client relationship so that the former Chief Legal Counsel can speak out freely as to what his legal opinion was and circumstances perta ining to the allegations that have been raised in committee and in the House? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, the answers and this discussion are all recorded in Hansard, I will be happy to provide a copy of the Hansard to the Hydro board. MR. PAWL EY: Mr .

Speaker, then from the Mini ster's response I am left with no alternative but to conclude that his answer is as they were recorded in Hansard, that the Manitoba Hydro Board would await an applic ation from Steward Marti n, Ch ief Legal Cou nsel for Manitoba Hydro, prior to considering releasing Steward Martin from solicitor client rela tionship. Is tha t what the Minis ter is acknowledging? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. LAURENT l. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, to the same Min ister.

Wouldn't the Min ister think that the people of Manitoba deemed it kind of fishy that a Min ister and the government took the in itiative to order a $3 million dollar study which certainly wasn't conclusive, didn't wait for the board to ask for this, and now that the same Mini ster will not be ready to at least recommend to the board that we have a chance to learn the truth at no cost to the taxpa yer by releasing Mr. Martin, letting him tell the people of Manitoba exactly what happened, isn't that kind of fishy? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Mini ster. MR. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, I'm happy to take that on because the member who's been in the House since 19 58 or '59 should know better than to cast that kind of innuendo with respect to any Min ister, of any government, at any time and I merely say to my hono urable friend that this Mi nister, his in tegrity needs no barricading from the likes of the Member for St.

Bonif ace or from anybody on that side of the House. 1 say the action that he has taken throughout with respect to his responsibilities for Manitoba Hydro from the moment he was sworn into office, have served in the highest degree of the public inter est of this province and the innu endos and so on that are being cast by the Member for St. Bonif ace might. I think in the public in terest of the province, be better kept there.

I say that to him, as one who was elected to this House just before him and one who, from time to time, has been known to agree with the 2684 member on different stands that he has taken in this House. I don't think that kind of unworthy attack on the integrity of a Mi nister of the Crown is deserved from him at this time. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. Boniface with a supplementary question. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I think that the public will think it's even fishie r no w when the Mi nister will not ans wer but his leader will.

All right, we want to get to the truth and I'm asking this to the same Minister - the First Mi nister can answer it if he wants - is the Minis ter ready to deny or confirm the allegation, that when the Minis ter was informed of the position of Mr. Mar tin, he threatened the board that if they went along with the advice they would be fired or some of the members would be fired? Does the member wish to deny or confirm these allegations at this time? I didn't make these allegations. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, it was reported in the committee stage very well and I think it may have been repeated in the House, in case it wasn't, I said that it was utter nonsense. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. D. JAMES WALDING: Mr. Sp eaker, my question is to the Minister reporting for Manitoba Hydro. I'd like to ask the Mi nister whether he has read the paper that I read into the record on Friday morning? MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. WALDING: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minister reporting for Manitoba Hydro whether he has read a document that I circulated amongst members of the House ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. May I point out to the hono urable member that I had stated previously today that it's a matter that's under the advisement of the Chair with respect to that document and I asked members not to refer to it until the Chair has made a decision. The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. WALDING: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I had not made refere nc e to the tabling of a document.

I'd made a reference to a document that I read from and that a number of ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. I would have to rule the question out of order. The Honourable Member for St. Vital with another question. MR. WALDING: Mr. Speaker, I'd wish to add ress a question to the Minister reporting to Manitoba Hydro and ask him if he is prepared to read this document that I will send over to him. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono ur able Mem ber for Brandon East.

Monday, 13 April, 1981 MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask a question of the Premier in the absence of the Mi nister re sponsi ble for the Civil Service of Manitoba. Can the Premier provide any general explanation or information on why the number of civil servants employed by the Manitoba Government has inc reased as of the year-end of 19 80 to 13 ,968 from 13 ,8 10 as of December, 19 79? MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I'd be happy on behalf of the Min ister, to take that question as notice.

I rather thought that as the Estimates were going through the House that my honourable friends, in their job as members of the Opposition, would be asking that kind of question with respect to each department, wherei n they wou ld get the an swer from each Minister as to what branches have taken on extra staff and so on. I can onl y pr esume th at the Department of Community Services has had to have extra staff to implement the white paper, etc., but we can get the detail of that if my honourable friend hasn't had the perspicacity to ask the question of Min isters as the Estimates have been proceeding through.

I conclude by saying that I find it rather ironic that the Member for Brandon East is the one who is now complaining about an addition of 10 0 or so to the Civil Service, which we were able to reduce by 2,000 after we picked up the mess of a government that they left. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. The time for question period having expir ed , we'll proceed with Orders of the Day. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Sp eaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for St. Johns, that;

WHEREAS the former Chairman of Manitoba Hydro, Dean Martin Wedepohl has acknowledged the existence of a legal opinion prepared for Manitoba Hydro and referred to in the House on April 10 by the Honourable Member for St. Vital, and the former Chairman has said the Deputy Premier was aware of the legal opinion; WH EREAS the legal opinion is th at the Tritschler Commission did not act within its terms of reference nor within the rules of natural justice, and it has been alleged that the Deputy Premier resorted to threats against the Hydro Board regard ing possible action upon the legal opinion; THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be authorized to enquire into: (

a) legal advice to Manitoba Hydro regarding the Tritschler Commission, (

b) breach by the Commission of its alleged terms of reference or the rules of natural justice, (

c) the Min ister's acknowledged in actions regarding Manitoba Hydro's position vis-a-vis the Commission, and 2685 (

d) all other matters ans1ng from the legal opinion and allegations made regarding this matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader on a point of order. HON. GERALD W.J. MERCIER (Osborne): Mr . Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I don't have a copy of the motion in front of me but as I heard it read, it appeared to me that it referred to comments made by the Member for St. Vital on Friday last which were contained in an unsigned document, a matter which you have already on two occasions today ind icated that you had reserved a ruling on. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, I submit to you that it's out of order because it asks a committee to enquire into legal advice to an agency of the Crown. I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that any matter such as that is out of order on the basis that legal advice to the Crown or a Mini ster of the Crown or Cabi net is privileged information and Beauchesne clearly points out that such information cannot be the subject of a question or an enquiry. Thirdly, Mr.

Speaker, this is a substantive motion of which I would suggest to you, Sir, notice should be given in the regular course if it is in fact deemed by you to be in order. (In terjections MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Kildonan on a point of order. MR. PETER FOX: Yes, Mr . Speaker, the Honourable House Leader raises a number of objections but unfortuna tely he misreads the reso lution as made in respect to a matter of privi lege.

I belie ve the information before that and the question that the Leader of the Opposition raised was in respect to someone's comments who was a board chairman at that particular time, not to any particular document. All he's ref erring to is that there is some confirmation and he's asking that the Committee on Public Utilities, which is the one through which Hydro reports to the Legislature, makes its report that it be reconvened and that the information be obtained through that particular vehicle that we always use. I think that is something that is for this House to decide and I believe that is in order, Mr.

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I point out to the Honourable Leader of the Opposition that our rules f"equire that any normal motion of this nature requi res 48 hours notice. I would suggest to the honourable member, place the notice on the Order Paper for this to occur. I do point out to the honourable member that we have at times by unanimous consent in the Chamber, allowed thing s to be exped ited but the nor mal course of action is the serving of 48 hours notice. Order pl ease. Or der please. The Honour able Member for St. Vital on a point of order. MR. WALDING: Mr.

Speaker, I point out for your information that ·my leader had risen on a matter of privilege and it has been pointed out I believe by you on several occa sions that a matter of pri vilege should be accompanied by a definite motion on which the House can take action. As happened on Thursday, with a very similar matter of privilege and a very similar motion, that there was no unanimous

Monday, 13 April, 1981 consen! �t that time to discuss the matter. It was treated as a matter of privilege as I believe this should be treated in the same manner. MR. SPEAKER: Order pl ease, the Hon ourable Member for Winnip eg Centre. MR. BOYCJ:: Further to the comments of the Member for St. Vital, Mr. Speaker, if you so rule at the mome'l\ I would suggest you would be setting a precedent.

I haven't got my Beauchesne with me, but there appears to be a conflict because the rules relative to privilege are and they include, "that the matter be raised at the first opportun ity and if someone can demons trate at a later date that it was not raised at the first opportunity, then a person can be precluded for presenting a matter of privilege". Second, the Member for St. Vital is absolutely right that in the past we have ruled in this House that it must be accompanied by a substantive motion.

So the rules relative to substantive motions in general do not apply in my opinion in this specific case; and rather than rule at the present time, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that you take it under advisement if you have an inclination so to rule because I believe that Beauchesne will substantiate both the Member for St. Vital and myself in this regard. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mem ber for Kildonan on a point of privilege. MR. FOX: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, the issue that is before us is that there is a matter of privilege that has been raised.

What is within the matter of privi lege may possibly need 48 hours notice, that is the calling of the Public Utilitie s Committee. But the matter of privilege has to be dealt with at the earliest time and I believe the Mem ber for St. Vital and also the Mem ber for Winnip eg Centre have in dicated the same and it's also part of our procedures. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I received no information at all from the Leader of the Opposition that he was rising on a matter of privilege. - (I nterjection)- Order please, order please. When the Leader of Her Majesty's loyal Opposition rose, he rose to introduce a motion.

He did not at any time ind icate that he was rising on a matter of privilege; therefore, I rule that as a regular motion it requir es 48 hours notice. On that basis I have ruled that, should the member wish to pursue the matter further, he should serve notice in the regular manner so that it can appear on the Order Paper. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: It's my opinion that the record will show that I did rise on a matter of privilege if indeed, Mr. Speaker, there is any question as to that. It certainly was my intention to rise on a matter of privilege. MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

Order please. The Honourable Government House Leader on the point of order. MR. MERCIER: In the House, Mr. Speaker, you have ruled and your ruling should not be questioned other than by a challenge of the ruling. 2686 MR. PAWLEY: Mr . Speaker, if privilege was not mentioned at the time of the motion, then it was a matter of ina dvertence which, Mr. Speaker, it is quite within your area of discretion. -(I nterje ction)- MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, then I would lik!l lO ask for your ruling, if you could ensure that we have some moderation in this Chamber so that a member can in deed hear himself speak. Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, if in deed the words on a matter of privilege were not voiced then, Mr. Speaker, it was simply a matter of ina dvertence. It is certainly within your discretion to allow the matter of privilege, even if the words on a matter of privilege were not worded, and if in deed Hansard does demons trate that. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please.

I have indic ated that I did not hear the words "matter of privilege" being raised by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. I have suggested that he follow the normal course of action of giving notice so it appears on the Order Paper. I will, as a further precaution, check the tapes that have occurred at this time and on that basis, I have suggested that the Leader of the Opposition follow the normal course of action and serve notice so it appears on the Order Paper. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I ask for leave if there was any difficulty in recognizing the fact that it was a matter of privilege, and I would expect on the part of fairness, and I would trust some degree of equity from the other side, that there would be concurrence to leave so that we could very easily, Mr. Speaker, indi cate that it's a matter of privilege, if indeed there is an omission so it can be cleared up right now and we can get on with the busine ss of the House pertaining to this crucial matter. MR. SPEAKER: Is there unani mous agreement? (Nay) Proceed then.

The Honourable Member for Winnip eg Centre on a point of order. MR. BOYCE: Yes, Mr. Speaker, you have just mentioned that you did not hear, and I want to confess that I was having trouble with my earphone; the sound seems to be vacillating and I don't want to reflect upon the ruling of the Chair.

But, nevertheless, as I witnessed what had transpired as the Leader of the Opposition rose in his place and proceeded to present a motion - at that time I can't recall whether he said "on a matter of privilege" - but he distinctly stood up after it was suggested by you, Sir, that the body of his motion would be considered out of order because it made reference to a document which you had under advisement. He stood up and said it was his intention to amend this motion as a matter of privile ge of the House and I think if you'll check the record, Sir, you will find that reference was given at that time.

Now I don't know whether that can be construed as notice or not - I'm speaking on a point of order - but nevertheless we're dealing with the matter of privileges of the House. That is why I said earlier that perhaps, Sir, you'd like to take it under advisement and rule perhaps

Monday, 13 April, 1981 tomorrow on this matter rather than rule at the present time; because as I say the sound - and I don't know what's the matter with the machine - but it is vacillating, especially when the Member for St. Johns was asking questions. If you check the record I think you will find, Sir, that the Leader of the Official Opposition did say that he was amending his motion on the matter of privilege. MR. SPEAKER: I thank the honourable member for his comments. We will now proceed with Orders of the Day. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MS. WESTBURY: Mr .

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Burrows, that an Order of the House to issue for a Return of the following information: 1. The reason or reasons the words "No twithstanding

Section 3", included in

Section 2 of (Manitoba Regulation 272-76) were removed from

Section 2 of the 19 80 Regulation under The Clean Environment Act respecting Private Sewage Disposal Systems. 2. The reason

Section 2(2) of the Regulation has been changed to allo w dis cha rge, subject to approval, of sewage or sewage effluent into a body of water or watercourse, which was prohi bited by

Section 2 of the former Regulation (Ma nitoba Regulation 272-76). 3. Who will be authorized to grant approval under

Section 2(2) of the Regulations. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order with respect to this Order for Return, which attempts to obtain reason or reasons. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that it relates to government policy. Orders for Return are designed to obtain factual information. I think on that basis, Mr. Speaker, this Order for Return should be ruled out of order. MS. WESTBURY: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MS. WESTBURY: Mr.

Speaker, I presented it as an Order for Return on your advice, Sir, after I asked a question in question period, so that in the meantime there's been a passage -of time in which I have not been able to obtain answers to questions and I have therefore presented the Order for Return as you suggested. I wonder what other advice you can have for me, Sir, in order to get informa tion. MR. SPEAK ER: The Ho nourable Mini ster of Consumer and Corporate Affairs on the point of order. MR. GARY FILMON (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I recall at the time when the questions were posed they appeared to be rather lengthy and Mr.

Speaker was rightfully concerned about the length of time that it might take to give this response in the House. 2687 I might say that I do have the information to respond to these in question form, and perhaps it would better serve the House if I provided the answers in written form to the member. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader on the point of order. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, the Min ister may very well want to, between himself and the Member for Fort Rouge, arrange to ans wer the questions somehow but I'm not withdrawing my point of order, Mr. Speaker, as drafted.

I'm submitting to you, Sir, that the Order for Return is out of order for the reasons that I have cited. MR. SPEAKER: Would the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge be prepared to withdraw the Order for Return and either dr aft it in a form th at is acceptable, or else obtain the information privately from the Minister? Is that agreeable? MS. WESTBURY: Mr. Speaker, I shall look forward to the private meeting with the Min ister. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. On Friday, April 10 th, the Honourable Member for St.

Vital presented to the House a document which he stated will be of considerable interest to members on both sides of the House. He then proceeded to read this document and at the conclusion of the reading, said he would table it. Subsequent examination of the paper in question established that it was unda ted, unsigned and directed to no one. There was no indication that the document had, in fact, ever been presented at any time to anybody.

Cit ation 329(4) of Beauchesnes Parliament ary Rules and Forms, Fifth Edition states that, "When quoting a letter in the House a member must be willing either to give the name of the author, or to take full responsi bility for the contents himself". The Honourable Member for St. Vital is on record as saying, "I cannot attest to the accuracy of this document. I do not know who wrote it". In other words, he is unable to give the name of the author or to take responsi bility for the contents.

I also asked Legislative Counsel for his opinion with respect to this matter and I wish to quote a portion of his reply: "When a document is tabled it seems to me only reasonable that there should be some identifying information going along with the document indi cating in some matter, either its source, its author, when or how it was published, or the nature of its publication, or how the member obtained possession of the document.

Without some or all of such facts being indicated, the document merely stands as some thing which the member himself is putting forward and if he has already read it, there is no need to table it, nor would I think it proper to table it". Citation 327(6) of Beauchesnes Fifth Edition states in part, "A private member has neither the right nor the obli gation to table an official or any other document ".

Rule 29(1) of our own Rules states: "Where in any debate a member quotes from a private letter, any other member may require the member who quoted from the letter to table the letter from which he quoted, but this rule does not alter any rule or

Monday, 13 April, 1981 practice of the House relat ing to the tabling of documents other than private letters". In my search for an ans wer to the problem confronting me I had enquiries made ot the House of Commons in Ottawa. The information I have been able to obtain from that source is to the effect that Citation 327(6), quoted above, is strictly adhered to and a private m 'ember would not be permitted to table a do<;;yf11 ent.

Based UJlen all the information available to me it would appear that an unsign ed and unid entified document is an incomplete document and cannot be considered to be properly before the House. Proceed with Orders of the Day. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Min ister of Finance, Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolv e itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply with the Honourable Member for Radisson in the Chair for the Department of Education and the Honourable Member for Virden in the Chair for the Department of Natural Resources. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - NATURAL RESOURCES MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor (Virden): I call the committee to order. I'll call in the Minister of Natural Resources. HON. HARRY J. ENNS (Lakeside): Mr.

Chairman, just to provide some information, Clerk's assistance to honourable members, first of all, the question was asked about the number of water rights licences for surface and groundw ater appl ications. That might have been by the Hono urable Member for St. George or it could ha ve been the Hono urable Member for Ste. Rose as well but cop ies are available for that. The Honourable Member for Rupertsland asked for copies of the prel i:ni nary management plan for the Cape Churchill Wildlife Management Association. I have two copies for the honour able members.

Should members on our side wish to have them, they are available to us through my office. Further to that the Honourable Member for Ste. Rose specifically asked for information on the location of Crown land sales throughout the province and the value of these sales. I would provide him with a copy of the most recent computer printout of the transactions taking place in this regard. Then in addition to that I would ask the Clerk to hand out a more detailed plan of the description of Acquisition /Construction projects for the year, 1981- 82, including a map.

I think the Honourable Member for Portage will find that particularly helpful since he was asking for it. The Clerk will be distributing these. 2688 Perh aps I would ask the Clerk to leave a few additional copies on this side of the table, there will be other members joining us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I think that more or less keeps the commitments that were made during the course of the Estimates on an earlier occasion about supplying additional information. MR. CHAIRMAN: 13. (!'l) - the Member foF Ste. Rose. MR. A.R. (Pete) ADAM: Mr.

Chairman, last week I was asking about the dam at Grandview and what was happening to resolve that problem. We have received some information from the Mi nister and from the department there but I unde rstand that there was a hearing held at Grandv iew I believe to look into all these matters. Am I correct on that, the moving of the dam? MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I must conclude and confess to some lack of specific information as a result of perhaps my relative newness to the deparment.

But I would have to conclude that with the positive action program that was outlined to the honourable member when last this committee met, namely, that there's an agreement to proceed with the construction of the community dug-out for the water supply for the commun ity; the agreement, following proceed ing with that su ccessful construction project, the elimination of the damn in question which has been of some concern to the community that the time for hearings has passed. I'm not aware of any hearings that the department has scheduled.

I would solicit from the member if he has some additional information that I'm not aware of. Now there may be, of course, something to do with the relocation of the Department of Highways but my understanding is that has been resolved based on the firm decisions that Highways knows and has ascertained the site location of No. 5 Highway in that particular area; that we have subsequently made our plans and are intending to proceed. Mr.

Chairman, the Director of Water Resources ind icates to me that a hearing may be scheduled und er the sponsorship of the Clean Environment Commission to look into the question of lagoon location or the operation of the lagoon situation in that area, but it would not be part of the prpposed dug-out construction and damn removal program. MR. ADAM: My understanding is that there has been a hearing held there just recently in regard to something. I was just wondering whether it was in conjunction with all these changes, the highway changes and the removal of the damn which would have som!l environmental consequences.

I was wondering if such a hearing did take place, and I unde rstand that it did, whether it would be possible to obtain copies of the transcripts so that we could see re ally wha t was di scussed . I suspect th at probably there was much more, I know that there's a tanner y ther e at Grand view which apparently is polluting your waters. This is hearsay that there's a tannery which is dumping whatever it is they're dumping into your nice waters and that it may have had something to do with this aspect of it. But I'm sure that when there's a hearing of that nature there's other things that become involved because

Monday, 13 April, 1981 I've had the opportunity to speak on Saturday to one of the people who have been having concerns with what the Minis ter is trying to rectify now, with his projects. I mentioned to him that I had brought this up at committee, Thursday I thought it was that we talked about it or Friday, and that I thought that his problems were solved and he said, no way. He said they had a big hearing here, environmental hearing and he says nothing is resolved. So I just take those comments, I don't know what he meant.

There may be something else that's going to come up and I was just wondering if it were possible for the Minister or his department to enquire from his colleague, the Mi nister responsible for the Environment, to see what took place there. If it is possible to get transcripts of that hearing so we know what went on. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I repeat, this department is not aware of any such hearings. But again, on the advice recei ved, it could well be th at Cl ean Environment Commission has held hearings recently in that community.

I'm sure that while my colleague is not present that if the honourable member were to direct that question to the department responsible this is public information and he would be only too prepared to provide the honourable member with that information. Mr. Chairman, just by way of correc tion, my modesty prohibits me from assuming ownership of the water that he suggested I was allowing to be polluted. The member kno ws full well tha t the ownership of that water rests in the hands of our gracious Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, Protector of the Realm and Faith. MR.

ADAM: We will attempt to get the transcripts from another Mi nister. If the Minis ter does not wish to do so on our behalf here at the committee, we will attempt to do so ourselves. I would ask him then if he could advise if it is cor rect that the office re sponsible for Water Resources, Natural Resources in Grandview is being closed out and moved out of there; is that correct? MR. ENNS: Mr .

Chairman, I think I touched on this subject in other sessions of this committee that reorganization within the department have called for and have cause for some reallocation of staff, that's a continuing process from time to time. The particular location in question is not one that I'm aware of is being moved; it's a conservation officer that's located in that community and we have no intentions of moving that officer at this time. MR. ADAM: Yes. The report that we had was that whatever facilities there were in place by the Department of Natural Resources would be moved to some other area from Grand view.

If the Minister says that is not going to happen that settles it there, we don't have to continue to request further information. I would ask the Minister, are there any plans by the Department of Natural Resou rces to decentralize some of the staff to Brandon? MR. ENNS : Mr. Chairman, I bel ieve the staff allocation that is currently working out of Brandon is essentially in place and we have a substantial component of the department in Brandon.

There are no plans that I am aware of, either looking at the 2689 Director of Water Resources or Parks, that would call for any further movement of staff to Brandon at this time. I may ask the honourable member, that we are no w dealing with Acquisition /Construction of Physical Assets, Resolution 13 , and while staff are cer tainly capital in the Department of Na tur al Resources they do not quite fall under the resolution now under discussion by this committee. MR. ADAM: Mr .

Chairman, I could wait I suppose till we get to the Mi nister's Salar y to ask further questions but then I have a few other questions that I want to ask of you. In regard to the residential sites on Cr own land, do they take pr eference over agriculture or any other use? MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chairman, again, if the honourable member wishes to talk to me about the Capital Program in the Parks Division of the department which would involve such things as development of campgrounds or the upgrading of additional facilities, recreation! and otherwise, in different regions of the province, that would all come under the various regions that Parks' people are responsible for.

The specific question that the honourable member again discusses was dealt with under Crown Lands division of the department and I would, without appearing to be uncooperative, ask honourable members, we have a substantial Capital Pr ogram before us in Resolution 13 that involves both improvements to the Parks' system an d, of course, the major program that I distri buted which members have in their hands, construction and reconstruction of various provincial drainage projects that we could perhaps deal with the specific item under Resolution 13 and leave the opportunity that the discussion on Minister's Salary provides for any clean-up questions that honourable members may have.

I'm well aware that, for instance, having supplied at your request various pieces of information that were not immediately available to me as we went through the different sections. I refer to some of the information that I just handed out this morning, for in stance, on the Wildli fe Mana gement Ar ea at Churchill or the computer readouts of the sale of Crown land properties but I thought we had some unde rstandin g that those could be handled in a general way when we get to the final item, namely, the Mini ster's Salary. MR. CH AIRMA N: I wonder if I could have the permission of the committee to pass 13. (

b) and 1 think then we are on to the subject that maybe the member is wanting. We are on 13. (

b) at the moment -p ass. MR. ADAM: No, I just have a few more questions here. In regard to major drainage constructions and so on in the program; last year I think the emphasis was moving away from draina ge, from rural drainage. I think the emphasis was to provide . . . MR. ENNS : I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I was distracted from the question. Could the honourable member repeat the question? MR. ADAM: I believe last year we were shifting away from farm drainage and so on to provide more protection for communities, towns where there are

Monday, 13 April, 1981 larger populations. I thought that was the emphasis last year and I'm wondering whether or not we are proceeding again with this policy. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, the honourable member is not inc orrect when he suggests that we have a fairly major ongoing pr ogram in volving floo d protection of various types, but they are two distinct programs. The ongoing provincial drainage or waterway pr ogram that pr ovides a continual improvement and reconstruction of the agricultural drainage program is one segment of the program.

We have identified and are working co-operatively, we hope, with federal authorities to provide cost sharing arrangements that will enable us to, at the same time, effect those changes and improvements to the flood protection works that are of equal importance in this province. I think during the course of my Estimates I have indicated th at we have concluded sat isfactory arrangements with the Federal Government that will enable us to upgrade the ring-dike communities of the Red River Valley to full protection level of the 10 0-year flood. That is a multimillion dollar program that will comme nce this summer.

I have also identified and indi cated to honourable members thr ee very specific additional commun ity floo d protection programs that we are very concerned about and have placed very high on the list of priorities and they involve the communities of Gimli, Ste. Rose and Carman. I thought I had indicated to them that our negotiations with the federal authoritie s are in comple te with respect to these communities.

The problem of fully identifying and cost-benefit ratios which are a prerequisite to any federal sharing for their participation in thes e programs are probably the major cause for delay or lack of final approval with these programs but they are very much part of the program. So the program that Water Resources generally are inv olved in perhaps can be identified with even one further category. We have the regular work that we continue to do on our provincial waterway system, principally to provide agricultural dra in. We have the flood pro tect ion works of various description that is going on.

Then in addition to that we have just recently concluded I believe in March of this year a drought proofing ag reement, interim agreement with the federal authorities which again calls for the program of some $8 million to $9 million, 8.9 pretty well $9 million program over the next three years, where the principle object of t'lat program is to gain the kind of technical da ta that is re quir ed to provide the kn owledge that will enable us to firm-up our information on such things as groun dwater resources to allow agricultural requirements to be met from that source.

The potential diversion of water such as from the Assinib oine to other portions of the water short areas of the province and/or the actual construction of surface reservoirs of which a number of projects have been identified and planning work is proceeding with. So you have those three aspects of the Wa ter Resou rces respo nsibil ity - flood protect ion, regular maintena nce and improvement to the provincial waterway system and the drought proofing program. MR. ADAM: Yes. Last year there was the emphasis on agriculture, more emphasis on town di king 2690 protection.

I'm just wondering if that is going to continue, that there be more emphasis placed on the diking. Last year I raised questions, and maybe the year before but certainly last year, to this Mi nister when he was responsible for EMO I guess or the flood. Are you still responsible, sir, for that? MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, the Min ister di rectly responsible for that is the Mi nister of Corpo rate and Consumer Affairs, I believe, Mr. Filmon. Pardon me that stayed with Government Services - that is Emergency Me asures Or ga ni zation stayed with Government Services, the Member for Morris. MR.

ADAM: Last year I raised a question a this Min ister I believe in regard to the expansion of the Red River Program, flood protect ion, to deal with those problems outside of that area, in other areas of the province. At that time I received a reply that well we're negotiating with the Federal Government and I expect an agreement very shortly.

I would like to kno w now whether or not the agreement with the Federal Government will apply also to those areas outside of the Red River Valley, although we know that was a priority because it was a very serious matter when we had the last flood there, but there were also some very problem areas outside as well and I know personally neighbour s of mine that have lived in certain areas for 20-30 years and haven't been flooded out too often and all of a sudden out of five years maybe get flooded three or four times and then they've had to pull stakes and move away and buy more land.

In fact, one fellow had to buy another

section of land to move his operation away from wher e he was, moved his buildings, moved every thing and received no assistance whatsoever. That is why I was pressing the issue last year and I'm still pressing it now and hopefully the Minister can advise us that the program that was put in place for the Red River Valley can be extended to those other areas when they also are faced with simila r problems, maybe not on such a iarge scale, but there are in dividual problems that happen where people have to pull up and move out.

The Minister last year gave us the undertaking that very shortly there would be an agreement and I'm just wondering if that is correct or not now, if that has come to pass. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, again pointing out that essentially the admin istration of that program is carried out through Government Servic es and possibly, you know, it requires the involvement of Financ e in terms of sat isfa ctorily bring ing to a conclusion a federal sharing role.

I have consistently taken the position that the program should be expanded to include those areas that the honourable member is concerned about; I have so answered to questions in the House in dica ting th at and I ackno wledge that. Ther e was at that time an in dication, although not at the political level but certainly from the officials' level, that there would not be a great deal of difficulty in expanding the original areas or boundaries of the program that would make this possi ble.

I must report to the honour able member that successive attempts have been made with no positive response coming from the Federal Government at this time. That leaves the province in a difficult position of not being able to proceed with

Monday, 13 April, 1981 the program even though it is our stated intention to do so, but always subject to similar or the same kin d of federal sharing tha t the Federal Government provided in those areas where the programs have been carried out. I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that the province should carry out a program in the other parts of the province at 10 0 percent provincial respo nsibility when the Federal Government saw fit to share the respon sibility in, quite frankly, what were by far the bigger problem areas, namely, the Red River Valley.

As late as a month ago, a month-and-a half ago, I'm aware of a letter that, through the urgings of the Department of Government Services, the Mi ni ster of Financ e sent to the Federal Government requesting again their attention to this matter and hoping that a formula similar to the ones applied in those regions that have received this kind of assistance could be made available so that we could get on with the job. We have some 16 0-odd applications on file from the areas of the kind that the honourable member speaks of.

They are maintained on file; they've been notified, or at least some of them have been notified, I wouldn't want to say in each and every individual case, that subject to approval to this program works could proceed. But that's the situation as of to date and I would urge the honourable member to impress upon my colleague, as I will continue to do so, the importance of concluding that federal agreement that will enable us to proceed with this assistance in areas other than the Red River Valley and those other designa ted areas that are currently covered by the agreement. MR.

ADAM: On these the 10 0-some applications that the Min ister indic ates there are on file, are these from indi viduals; would they be coming primarily from ind ividuals or communities? MR. ENNS : Mr. Chairman, these are indi vidua l applications that have come to the Flood Disaster Assistance Board under the chairmanship of Mr. Elswood Bole. I believe the applications have been acknowledged and the position of the government has been explained that subject to a satisfactory sharing arrangement to be worked with the Federal Government, and I should indi cate, Mr .

Chairman, that we are not asking for any better or different sharing arrangement other than that was applicable to those areas of the province where the programs were being carried out, principally, the Red River Valley. I might just for the honourable member's information ind icate that it's our estimate that while some $9 million was spent on this program in the Red River Valley, it is our estimate that an additional total of $4 million would pretty well resolve the issue in other parts of the province now not covered.

On the basis of 50-50 sharing tha t wou ld mean a commitment of some $2 million of provincial funds along with the $2 million of federal funds but, Mr. Chairman, the Federal Government to date has not confirmed their willi ng ness to partici pate in this program. MR. ADAM: Is the cost-sharing 50-50 or what is the ... ? MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chairman, on this specific program - and I have to be careful because again there are 2691 different types of flood reduction or flood protection programs, I wouldn't want this to be confused with any undertakings such as the building of community dik es, ring dikes - this program is applicable to the ind ividual farm site which provides them with assistance according to a formula to either move homes, raise homes or to develop individual farm site ring dik e, diking system around the farm yards. That program was shared on a 50-50 basis with the Federal Government. MR.

ADAM: Does the farmer or the ind ividual have to pay some as well? MR. ENNS: The program pays 75 percent up to $1 0,000 pe r application, so in other words there is a 50-50 sharing of the 75 percent by the two governments and the ind ividual contri bute s 25 percent if he takes the maximum $10,000.00. MR. ADAM: Then, Mr . Chairman, if it goes beyond the $1 0,000 then he carries the balance. MR. ENNS: The in divid ual lando wner, property owner has to assume those costs. MR. ADAM: Yes.

I'm looking forward to a program, maybe it doesn't require such a big program as this, as was experienced in the Red River Valley, but if we had a simila r prog ram for flood pr otect ion to indiv idual farmers in other areas of the province and it doesn't have to be near I think on the scale of this in most cases. I think in the case that I referred to where the fellow had to pull up stakes and move out, probably that would be one that may be a major one.

But outside of that I'm sure that if there was a $500 grant or something or $1 ,000 grant to do some levying around or protection of a farm site or farmyard just to deal with those heavy spring runof fs where they get flooded in spring year after year or every other year, those are the kinds of programs what we would like to see in place. I'm not sure if we didn' t have that kind of a program some years ago; it seems to me that there was a program in the past and what has happened to that I don't know. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chairman, I'm advised some time ago that there was a program in place which simply wasn't being utilized, applications for which weren't being received. It consequently, in subsequent years, was not pursued. The honourable member raises the question though of dealing with the cases, kind of one at a time or not in its totality. The difficulty is to be fair and equitable to the overall situation.

It was not that difficult even though a judgment had to be arrived at to declare the Red River Valley as the major flood-prone area in the province, having suffered the very substantia l dif ficult ies over a number of years, to be designated as a flood area. Being mindful of the time that we were doing that we were discrimina tory to some extent, not taking into account other areas that were subject to flooding, not on a similar scale but certainly as an individual I can appreciate that, my home floods on the banks of the Whitemud River or Ste.

Rose or at Gimli, that causes the same problems to me as if I were a resident in the Red River Valley. It's simply that measuring the resources available to the government of the province at the time they say designa ted the

Monday, 13 April, 1981 Red River Valley area in principle as being a No. 1 area priority to address themselves to, to try to resolve. I've always recognized some inequity in that position and have been a strong proponent to extend this program to cover the other areas of the province that are subject to periodic flooding. MR. CHAIRMAN: 13. (b) - pass; 13. (c) - pass.

Be it resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceed ing $12 ,628, 000 for Na tural Resources - pass. We return to Mi nister's Salary at (1). MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I may just interrupt the proce edings again in my willingn ess to cooperate. The Hono urable Member for Ste. Rose asked about a particular report. This is a report, Lake Winnip egosis, Lake Mani toba Recreat ional Waterways Project. As I indicated to him it's a rather substantial report. It also is the only report that the department has. I'd be quite prepared to allow the Honourable Member for Ste.

Rose to peruse it for a period of time with a request that he return it to the department so that they can continue their delayed study of the report. But I know it's a subject matter that the honourable member has expressed an interest in. This is the report that I referred to the other afternoon when we had some dif ficulty in understanding which report we were precisely talking about. I'd ask the Clerk to ... MR. ADAM: Yes. I appreciate the Minister's co operation and I'll be very pleased to return it after I've had a look at it. Thank you very much. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Rupertsland.

Is the Member for Ste. Rose finished? The Member for Rupertsland. MR. HARVEY BOSTROM: Mr. Chairman, I assume we're on the Mini ster's Salary at this point and I can raise a couple of issues which are of general nature. One is following up on the discussion we had with respect to the department's efforts in gearing up for equipment and crews in view of the predictions of a repeat of the hazardous fire season of 19 80. I would wonder, Mr.

Chairman, if I could ask the Min ister further to the information he's already provided to the committee if he is making an attempt to co ordinate with other provinces or federal government agencies and/or the U.S. authorities in terms of pulling together all of the resources and equipment that may be available to deal with the situation that we may be facing in Manitoba.

I would ask further to that if there are any long-range agreements in effect or in the negotiation stages with respect to the possibility of getting international or interprovincial co-operation and/or co-operation with the Federal Government, with respect to the use of some of the major equip ment that may be avai lable in other jurisdictions and even crews that may be available and specialized personnel that may be available. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chairman, it should be placed on the record that the department has over the years had pretty good co-operation from other provinces, from the Federal Government and their agencies and, as well certainly from the U.S. Ameri can 2692 adjacent governments, principally from Mi nnesota that have for instance last year accepted and helped us out in suppressing the fire problems in that south east corner of the province. There is not a formal agreement drawn up.

I would question the value of such foreign or formalized agreements in terms of being flexible enough to meet the very volatile and changin g req uir ements in the work that our department faces in suppr essing the forest fir e problem.

The item though that has concerned us and then I'v e had the opportunity of dis cussing with the Federal Minister directly as a result of a meeting that I had with him on another matter, that is the greater utilization - and here I believe there is room for some formalization if you like of the Federal Government, principally through the Defence Department - to play a more meaningful role in the fire suppression pr oblems that, not just we in Mani toba but generally across Canada provincial governments face.

For in stance, the hon ourable member is aware, he dr ew the matter to the attention of the House the other day, that substantial numbers of our armed forces stationed here in Manitoba are currently or about to or have left to training maneuvers and exercises at Gagetown, New Brunswick. I really think that a formal sitting down of recog nizing the armed forces' future role in forest fire suppression could bring about a resche duling if you like in the future of these kind of movements. We can pretty well pinp oint when our major problems with fire repression occurs across the prairies, for instance.

They may vary by some days or few weeks but principally it's this time prior to green growth, prior to when we've had shortage of snow cover, and dry years that you have the kind of critical situation facing us. That is not taken into account by Defence Department planning in terms of deployment of their troops, it is something that perhaps could be figured into in overall planning of the use of our mutual resources.

The suggestion has been made to me, certainly I know the question will be taken up, as to whether or not as part of the armed forces' regular training program crews couldn't be trained to handle some of the specific aircraft that we handle; in other words, that there could be checked-out crews situated in the regular armed forces but who are capable, who have been checked out on some of our water bomber craft. This is the kind of an arrangement that's not going to happen as a result of an emergency situation where the army comes to our aid and assistance in a drought program.

This is the kind of ihing that can only be brought about through a series of meetings and a deli berate pol icy established that this will become part and parcel of the Defence Department's contribution to forest fire repression in Manitoba. I happen to believe that it would be a very worthwh ile dir ective or goal to pursue. It seems to me a very useful kind of role for the military to play for a peace time standing army to be equipped to do. I'm not at odds with the honourable member's suggestion that we should be pursuing tho se avenues.

It would be not correct though for me to indi cate to the honourable member that is in place for this year's fire activity. We have been assured by Colonel Coddingham that equipment and men will be

Monday, 13 April, 1981 made available to us; that they are prepared to bring them back from exercises that are currently being or are being plan ned to be carried out in Ne w Brunswick, but that will not present an obstacle to us from having that equipment available to us at the time that we request it.

Now, I think you and I as a taxpayer and being concerned about the taxpayers' expenditu res might question, well, why did the equipment, or why was the helicopter, or why was this equipment allowed to leave the Province of Manitoba at this time and then be brought back at considerable expense to help them fight forest fires in Manit oba perhaps two weeks from now or two weeks after they have commenced maneuvers in New Brunswick? Again, that's the kind of thing that can only be resolved if there is this co-commitment and agreement that we ought to be working together on a somewhat more formalized way. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Rupertsland. MR. BOSTROM: More technical aspects of it, Mr. Chairman. I'm informed that there are some new technological in novations which may be of assistance to fire fighting forces, in terms of detection and early suppression of forest fires. For example, last year I'm told that new computers were used to predict where fires are likely to occur on the basis of satellite reports and that lightening-strike counters are being added to weather stations.

With these two in effect in one area of Canada last year computer predictions were 90 percent correct in anticipating areas where fires were likely to strike. Air craft patrols were maintained in those areas and helicopters and water bombers were able to suppress the fires before they got out of hand. I'm wondering if our forces in Manitoba are in vest igating thes e technol og ical advancements and if they are able to make use of them.

Sp ecifically, are the wea ther sta tions in Mani toba producing in formation on poten tial lighten in g-st rike areas and are there computer s available to the Province of Manitoba which would assist in predicting where fires are likely to occur? I mention this because last year. for example, it was my experience to travel through the north a number of times and in doing so I noticed a number of fires that were just burning completely out of control.

I know that it's difficult for the department to work on every fir e all over the place and they have to concentrate on those that are the most dangerous in terms of life and property and that's where they have to intensify the efforts. However, I am also aware that the most effective use of water bombers is when fires are in their start up stages and once the fire gets beyond a certain size water bombers are like throwing a spoonful of water on a bonfire and really you're not being very effective in the use of your water bombers.

So I'm wondering if it would be possible for the government to utilize these technological advancements and if there are others that they are looking at using, so that they may be more efficient in the use of the equipment that is available to the government. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, my only comments would be that in terms of some of the more sophisticated applic ation of satellite technology combined with computer aides, possibly have a role; no doubt they 2693 do.

I would think that the Federal Government has a primary respo nsibili ty inasmuch as they have the responsibility of the satellite that could possibly be involved; they have the responsibility of marrying that within their Me teorlog ical Weather Foreca sting Information Branch, and would not say that it hasn't got a role in the future. The department as such has not got that kind of funding to experiment with this technology. Since last year we used an early warning lightning strike detection system which we found pr oved to be un fea sible and the project was cancelled. A lot of this is experimental stage.

We had heat detection units equipped on our aircra ft that will sense intensity of heat where it otherwise is not visible to the naked eye but tells us that there is either peat fires, or what have you, potential outb reaks of hot spots, then ground staff can pinpoint and locate before they develop into major fires. Mr. Chairman, I certainly don't take any issue with the Hono urable Memb er for Rupertsland for exa mining all possi ble ways of bringing the full resou rces of the go vernment in cluding the technology, the state of the art of the day to bear on this important area.

I'm very concerned, as he is, that we protect our forestry reserves because we simply cannot afford economically and aesthetically in terms of our parks, to allow the kind of depredation to our forests and forest lands that do occur, as was the case during the last year starting just about this time. We believe that we have allocated, both in material and in staff, the capability of doing precisely what the honourable member quite correctly suggests is so important, to strike fast when a fire occurs.

We had last year so many fires involving settlements that drew so much of our resources to the settlement areas, that some of those fires that were burning in unsettled areas were not attended to as fast as they perhaps could have been. I certainly don't make that comment in any critical way of staff allocation of funds.

The policy was clear, to be concerned about the possibility of danger to life and property and as you kno w there was a substantial amount of evacuation that occurred in the province and in other jurisdictions, principally in No rthern Ontario, and there was substantial danger to Manitoba residents in a nu mber of occa sions wher e maximum departmental resou rces had to be on tap to circumvent any potential disaster from occurring. So, Mr. Chairman, I can perhaps only add one further thing. There has been a substantial revision in the forest fire pay

schedule rates this year, which staff informs me would again considerably enhance our capabili ty of enc oura ging and ge tti ng the necessary support from community people to assist us in the fight against fires. MR. BOSTROM: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, I'm informed that the Province of British Columbia is negotiating a Canada -U.S. agreement or a Pro vinc ial-U.S. agreement for mutual assistance for forest fir e emergencies and I'm wondering if the provi ncial go vernment is in volved in any way with this international discussion, or are they contemplating any di scussions of their own with respect to potentially having a mutual assistance program for the Provi nce of Mani toba and other states or American authorities.

Monday, 13 April, 1981 MR. ENNS: I'm aware that through the Canadian Council of Resource Mini sters the subject matter has been discussed. It's been in discussion stage for the past two years, but nothing of subs ta nce has resulted from them. I kno w theoret ically it is attractive to integrate cross-country capability in this matter but tha t's not taking into account the different ways that we fight fires. The Province of Albert I believe, for instance, is quite different than ours.

They use chemical retardants, simply because the lack of available water supplies that make the water bomber an attractive equipment to fight fires. We can utilize the water bomber to a far greater extent so that if you're looking at planes that are available for forest fire work, our planes, our water bombers are not necessarily of any great help to many regions of Alberta where water supplies are distant or are not read ily available to that kind of an opera tion. Secon dly, when we have the water available to us, would we want to or do we want to fight fires with chemicals?

We probably would not want to or don't have to do that. So there are these technical problems that staff indic ates to me when we really start talking about this concept, I know that it has been talked about, integration of equipment that makes it not quite as attractive when studied in detail. MR. BOSTROM: One other point in this area, Mr.

Chairman, and th at is, I would wonder if the government and the Minister is considering looking at more full use of the specialized equipment that the ·p rovince has available with respect to forest fire suppression, particularly the very expensive water bombers that are several million dollars each to purchase, which are really only used during the fire season, and if it happens to be not a very bad fire season the planes sit idle much of the time even during the fire season, and I'm wondering if they're looking at the possi bility of gett ing a more full utili zat ion out of these ai rcraft by making arrangements with other countries so that these planes could be a source of revenue to the government in the off-season by having them leased out to countries that may perhaps be having forest fire or fir e problems that could utilize such an aircraft.

Or alternatively if they were not used as a revenue source in that way, perhaps the same sort of thing could be negotiated on the basis of a trade-off or co-operation with other countries so that their equipment would be available to us in the off-season. I'm not talking ab out the Americ an continent necessarily; the government could be looking further afield in that I'm sure in finding some revenue source or some co-operative use of such an expensive aircraft. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Chairman, I can recall when I was Mini ster of Highways and Transportation for a short period of time, responsible for the air division, that we looked seriously at the idea of being able to generate some revenue during the off-season for particularly the very expensive, the L2- 15. The problem is that this is a very specialized aircraft and not too many of them are available in the country.

Our concern is that should they be leased out under some arrangement and to date we hav en't been able to sati sfy our selves that an economic return is available to us, but our greater 2694 concern is to have the aircraft available to us, not just simply the in surance payout if, en route to Argentina it gets shot down over El Salvador or someplace, and we are bereft of that aircraft.

It's small comfort to us to have the insurance money, and for me to be able to stand up in the House and say, "Ah, but the citizens of Manitoba didn' t lose any money in this lease arrangeme nt", but if we don't have the plane here to fight fires is a real concern. We did have a pilot last year, crew travel down to Argentina to further in vestigate this matter and now I'm speaking somewhat out of turn because I no longer have that responsibility, and I can't really ind icate to you the conclusions of that trip but I know that it has been looked at.

It's been of concern to us, particularly as we have two of them now standing on the tarmac for many months, motors shrouded and I believe we have the third on order, coming in next year, so the greater the investment that is idle by the nature of our season, I would suggest the more stringent or the harder this government or any government of the day will look at some of the suggestions that the honourable member is making. MR. BOSTROM: Mr. Chairman, rumour has it all the pilot learned was how to say, "dos cerveza, por favor".

On a more serious note, I would like to come back to the discussion that we had earlier during the Min ister's Estimates with respect to the Shoal Lake Band and their proposal for a cottage development. I note that in reread ing the Hans ard the Mini ster ind icated that he was told by his colleague, the Honourable Minister of Energy, that the agreements that were referred to by myself in the Estimates discussion were only at the staff level and that no government Mi nister or officials at the Cabinet level were involved in any of the discussions. Since that time, Mr .

Chairman, it has come to my attention, or at least I am told that, in fact, there was at least one Minister if not more, involved in these di scussions. Mr. Cr aik hims elf, the Mini ster of Energy, was involved at one point where he and the Deputy Minister of Mines and Resources apparently went by aircraft down to the Shoal Lake Reserve and looked over the situation; stopped at the Reserve and discussed the ideas with the Chief and Council. I'm told that it was subsequent to that that the first draft agreement was forwarded to the Shoal Lake Band.

I note something I overlooked when I first mentioned this to the Mini ster, but on the bottom of the letter which accompanied the first agreement there is a carbon copy ind icated to Mr. Don Craik. I'm wondering, Mr. Chairman, if the Mi nister could comment on this in light of his earlier statements, and if he could also explain why this discussion appeared to be involving the Deputy Mi nister of Min es, Resources and Environmental Management, as it was called at that time - the Deputy Mi nister was Paul E. Jarvis - involving him and the Mini ster of Energy, Mr. Don Cr aik. I'm pointing out, Mr.

Chairman, to the Mi nister that Mr. Craik was not the Mini ster of Resources at that time. I believe about that time it would have been either Mr. MacMa ster or Mr. Ransom, I'm not quite sure who was the Mi nister in November of 19 78, but certainly at no time was it the present Minister of Energy. I wonder if the Mi nister could indi cate why it was his impression that there was no mini·sterial

Monday, 13 April, 1981 involvement in these discussions at all, and why in this case there was the involvement of the Deputy Premier, rather than the Min ister of Mines. MR. ENNS: Well, Mr. Chairman, it's not unusual for different Mi nisters to become involved in activities that are not immed iately germane to their department. I'm aware of Mr. Craik's involvement and the extent of the same. I'm also aware and have made a point of checking with the department, that the then Mi ni ster of Na tural Resour ces, the Honourable Mr.

Ransom was not involved in these discussions, and not involved in meetings with the Band in question. Mr. Chairman, the att ention came to the Department of Natural Resources. The request was brought more formally to the Department of Natural Resources on or about November of '79, that is my information, at which time Mr.

Ransom was still the Min ister; I assumed the portfolio in mid-January, I believe, and upon checking my departmental files that was the extent of the contact between the Shoal Lake Band and the Department of Na tur al Resources, the department principally responsible for the granting or the providing of Crown land that would enable the access road to be built. My discussions with Mr . Craik further support that, yes, he was cer tainly in terested.

I don't know whether this came about partially because of some of the reorganization that was taking place involving the Deputy Mi nister of Natural Resources at that time, Mr. Paul Jarvis. There was, as the members will recall, a splitting up of certain responsibilities within that department. Min es and a portion of what used to be Natural Resources went over the newly created Department of Energy and Mi nes. I don't see any thing untoward for the then Deputy Minister of Mi nes and Natural Resources, Mr. Jarvis, being inv olved in the matter. By that time his Mi nister was Mr.

Craik, and I suppose that's how cont act was established. I reiterate what I said on the previous occasion that this matter has come up, discussions, possible solutions to the problems, letters, all of this is a matter of public record and the honourable member is putting on the record those items that perhaps have not been placed before, but none of them constitutes any decision by government or by this department a formal agreement. We simply have not arrived at that stage and for that reason I don't think it's a question of living up to agreement or not living up to agreement, concurring with an agreement.

The Department of Natural Resources has not been party to an agreement with Shoal Lake Indian Band No. 40. MR. CHAIRM AN: ( 1) the Memb er for Rupertsland. MR. BOSTROM: Mr. Chairman, just to follow up on what the Min ister has said in committee before and what has been reported in the press. He has been quoted as saying that it is his objective to try to settle this matter as expeditiously or as quickly as possible for all parties concerned. I would ask him to be more definite in his statement on that.

I would ask him to look at it in light of what is happening at the present time and that is, as far as I'm informed the band is proce eding, along with the Federal 2695 Governmen t , to do a full Environ mental Im pact Study. I'm not quite sure what the status of that study is at the present time. But given that's in process and hopefully a result will come from that which the government can look at and determine whether or not there will be any unfavourable impact on the water supply.

I suppose it's a hypothetical sitution but I'm asking the Minister to ind icate what he would do if the environmental impact were to show that the cottage sub-division or whatever they're proposing is to be designed in such a way as to not unfavourably impact on the water supply; will the Min ister then proceed to allow access across Crown land for that particular development?

Will he be doing something along the lines of the dra ft agreement which was sent to the Band, in terms of providing access for Manitobans to that area by way of having some shoreline along the development made available for some public use? Now it was never clearly determined in any of these agreements what the use of that land would be put to and it's something the Band had asked the province to clarify. I would think it'd be in the in terest of Manitobans if there's no unfavourable environmental impact to have access to a public use area in that area of Shoal Lake, something which they do not now have. MR.

ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I suppose the short answer to that would be I'll cross that bridge when I find the river or something like that. But I should ind ica te to the hono urable member that the department is cer tainly conc erned about the Environmenta l Impact Study's results. Then as I ind icated before to work in a co-operative manner with the City of Winn ipeg. I can ind icate to the honourable member that a meeting was scheduled with Ma yor Norrie and because of Mr. Ja rvis' previous involvement in it, myself and the Deputy Minis ter of Mi nes and Energy.

Unf ortuna tely it occurred on the same date of Governor Olsen's visit from North Dako ta to the province and I was precluded from attending that meeting. But it would no t be the departme nt's or this go vernment 's interest to refuse a legitimate request, subject to other fears being satisfactorily allayed. It would therefore be premature on my part to speculate in a hypothetic manner the outcome of several things that are now happening.

Environmental Impact Study is under way in my understa nding; the results of which be satisfactory to the City of Winnip eg and if a subsequent arrangement could be arrived at that would provide access to this area that meets with the approval of the very substantial concerns that the City of Winn ipeg have, subject to those concerns being met then certainly the department would take a fresh look at the situation. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think I'll have to call it 4:30. The Minister of Northern Affairs. HON.

DOUG GOURLAY (Swan River): If we can get some indi cation from the members opposite how much longer we'll be in this department; whether we' ll be getting started in Mu nicip al Affairs this evening. If so I would like to be able to notify my staff. MR. CHAIRMAN: Have the members any ind ication how much longer it might be?

Monday, 13 April, 1981 MR. BOSTROM: I don' t have a lot of other questions, Mr . Chairman. I don't ex pect my involvement to be more than half an hour or so. MR. ADAM: Min e won't be any longer than that either. MR. BOSTROM: So it's very possi ble that we could conclude early enough this even ing to get into another department. MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee rise. SUPPLY - EDUCATION MR. CHAIRMAN, Abe Ko vnat s (R adisson): Committee will come to order. I would direct the honourable members' attention to Page 49 of the Main Estimates, Department of Education. Resolution 53, Clause 4. Provincial Development and Support Services. Item (

m) Student Aid,

(1) Salaries - pass. The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN: Mr. Chairman, last day we were discussing some of the problems that have been noted and complained about by students in regard to auditing and I, at that time, read into the record a letter written by a student to the Free Press in which she compared the practice and procedures of the Min ister -and his department to 19 84, and we all kno w about that novel and about the bleek futuristic descriptions put there by George Orwell.

I want to re-enforce those statements by referring to a whole series of comments that appeared in today's paper, in the Free Press. in which it said that the Audit System for Manitoba Students Toughest in Canada, is the headline. (Int erject ion)- Right. So you know we don't object, as I've said before, to some monitoring - which is a favorite word of the government and the Min ister - and we don't object to checks being made to make certain that students are not cheating or abusing or providing inadequa te information for the purpose of obtaining bursaries, schol arsh ips, loans, etc.

I don't think anybody objects to the principle that there should be some check made on loan applications but it is a matter of degree. We also don't think that it is a very good idea to come down in an unduly harsh manner on students in comparison to certain other government programs which seem to be, if not loose, at least more relaxed, in terms of the manner in which people are treated. What I am saying in short, Mr. Chairman, is that we don't want students regarded as se cond-cla ss citizens and we don't want the Minis ter or his agents badgering or harassing students undu ly.

So the principle is fine, it is the application that I want to question here, in particular, and I would like to refer to a few remarks made here in this

article from spokesmen for student unions across Canada. For ins tance. a survey of students in B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan. Ontario and Nova Scotia and the National Union of Students said that they have not heard of any province other than Manitoba which goes so far as to require gr ocery receipts and cheque stubs dating back many years. Now I want to ask the Minis ter about that particular point.

Is that in fact true, or is that a gross exaggerat ion. because I can tell him I don't know what his habits are or what the habits are of other members in the Chamber - but I can tell you one thing - I never keep grocery bills more than a few minutes after the gr oceries have been put away. Do you have a grocery bill, Mr. Chairman? May I examine it? Perhaps you could sen d it to the Min ister and he could look at it. But that would be the in teresting thing, as to whether we're talking about the gr oceries you bought yesterday - April 13 th - Mr.

Chairman, I want to say to you that this is a recent bill from April 13 th of this year. - (Int erject ion)- Today in fact is the 13 th, right. But I want to point out that it's uns igned and I can't accept it as a document to be tabled in this House. For all I know you invented this bill or fabricated the figures, so I would have to rule on your point of privilege that it is not accepted. But, Mr.

Chairman, you'll note that you happen to have a bill in your pocket but there are people who laboriously keep everyt hing, and I tend to be a person who doesn't throw a lot of things out - there are the keepers and the th rowers-away of our society - but it depends on what we are talking about. Souvenirs or programs or magazines. I'm one of those who has them going back years and I hate to throw out a magazine even if it's two or three years old. Grocery bills I fire out into the waste basket almost as soon as they come in the door.

I wonder if I could just begin my remarks by asking the Min ister to comment on that. I think he's prepared to comment. If so I would then move on to a couple of other points. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Min ister. HON. KEITH A. COSENS (Gimli): I've made several comments on this matter, but I am prepared to react briefly to what the member has mentioned today. I'm not prepared of course to react to what certain people may have said in the newspaper after being phoned because I don't kno w what questions were posed to them at that time. But I would point out to the member right now, Mr.

Chairman, that the audit does not request grocery receipts. I emphasize that, Mr. Chairman - and the honourable member has made a great to-do about gr ocery receipts - I repeat the audit process does not req uest gr ocery receipts. I would like the hon ourable member to perhaps supply some proof that gr ocery receipts have been requested. Now, Mr. Chairman, having said that it is quite possible that a student in attempting to justify or explain some large withdrawal from a bank account may have in fact used gro cery receipts as part of that justification.

If that is the case then certainly that is their choice, they have decided that part of that withd rawal was for the pur pose of purchasing gr oceries. But it is not routinely the policy of our department to request gro cery receipts at all, Mr. Chairman. 1 would also mention to the honourable member that there are some comments in that particular newspaper

article that are highly complimentary to the program. MR. DOERN: Mr. Chairman. a couple of points there. I want to refer back then to a letter that I referred to on Friday that was written by a student, a 2696

Monday, 13 April, 1981 Margaret Watts and what she said in her letter, and I'll just read the Mi nister a couple of sentences. She said, "The next time you go to the drug store, the grocery store or write a cheque, remember if you ever want to go to university that purchase may be held against you". Then she asked the question, "When was the last time Mr. Cosens kept his Safeway bill? That is exactly the kind of information students are asked to provide". I don't know what the facts of the matter are. I'm just saying that students are claiming that this is the ty pe of information that they are being asked for.

Perhaps the Minister should issue a dir ective to his staff, or discuss this with his staff and make certain that we're not crossing the line between what would be considered to be a reasonable check and undue harassment. I'm saying that the reputation of Manitoba is I think suffering as a consequence. I have to remind the Mini ster that he not only repr esents the taxpayers, which is a heavy responsi bility, but he also represents the students and he mustn't become overly zealous in prosecuting students because he is, at the same time, supposed to be their champion.

He is one who is supposed to assist and aid students in going to un iversity, not di scouraging them or blocking them from proceeding into the halls of higher learning. I'm telling him that his reputation as a tough guy is probably going down well in certain quarters but it is not going down well at the university. As a result to a certain extent he has given a black eye to the whole Student Aid Program from coast to coast. I want to refer to some comments made in this particular

article where this sort of information was drawn to the att ention of students from coast to coast , combined with the fact that Manitoba has had the greatest drop in applications for student aid in recent years. According to this

article 650 students face detailed audits and probably as a consequence there was a fall-off in applications. For in stance a student vice-president from Dalhousie said, "I can't imag ine that. It sounds slightly ridiculous", referring to Manitoba's reputation as being the toughest in Canada. The same student from Nova Scotia saying that it was "bureaucratically distress ing". A student from British Columbia, James Hallis said, "There's nothing as bizarre as that. We're quite civil ized out here".

I don't want the Minis ter being thought of as a barbarian or mean person, or what somebody once on TV called a baddie, a heavy. Someone from Alberta, Phil Soaper, student president said, "I t's that exhaustive? Wow]"· and so on and so on. Jeff Parr, who's from the National Union of Students' offices said, "They're pursuing their audit a lot more zealously than other provinces. It's pretty incredible. I've never heard of any other provinces doing those things".

James Egan, who is aU of M Student Union president said that applications have dropped in Manitoba, he said 7 percent in the last year, and says that the poor reputation of the program among students is to blame. So I'm just saying to the Mi nister, he I think should check out these particular articles. If these articles are misleading; if the information isn't accurate then he has a right to put it on the record.

But if there's any truth to this as being heavy-handed performance on the part of some senior civil servants or some people further down the line, then I think he should issue a directive, and make it clear that this and this is acceptable, and this and this, isn't, because as I say to him again, he has to watch his Budget, but he must represent the students as well as the teachers and the professors and the parents. It would seem that he is not protecting the students here, but he is allowing them to be used as open season by certain people within his department. MR. COSENS: Mr.

Chairman, the Memb er for Elmwood has never been too bothered by the facts. I think he would rather deal with newspaper articles that may or may not be based on a solid premise. Again I say, without any kn owledge of wha t questions may have been asked, the people at the other end of the telephone, or in fact, how the questions were placed, which can certainly determine what type of answer you'll receive. I would be very doubtful that the people who were phoned had any un derstanding of the Student Aid Program in Manitoba as it compared with the program in their province. I reiterate again, Mr.

Chairman, that we do not set out to persecute, prosecute, any students with this audit. We are merely tr ying to make sure that moneys are being directed toward those who have real need. Of course, if the honourable member, Mr . Chairman, would like me to produce a long litany of cases of individual students that have been audited and what we have determined by that audit, that substantiates why we should have an audit, I would be quite prepared to do so, because if he's saying that we shouldn't do it, that it shouldn't be carried on and so on, then that's fine, Mr. Chairman, then we know his position.

He perhaps may not be saying that, but he is more or less harping on the idea, trying to produce an image that we're unreasonable, that our people are asking for things they shouldn't be. I point out to him, on this silly business about grocery lists and recei pts from gr ocery shopp ing, that is no t something we require, that is not something we ask for. Of course he has made a gr eat issue of this grocery receipt. However, if someone wishes to use it to justify considerable withdr awals from a bank account, they are certainly free to do so, Mr . Chairman.

Again, the honourable member uses that as a big issue, and would like to certainly baloon it all out of proportion. · I mention to him in his comparison of student aid policies across this country, that if he wishes to look at one province in particular, they do 10 0 percent audit before a student receives any student aid; 10 0 percent audit before anyone receives any aid. Now, does he consider our policies in relation to that, to be too restrictive, to be unreasonable, Mr. Chairman, where we do not follow that procedure at all?

In fact, students receive their aid and the audit is conducted after they have received some proportion of that aid. So, Mr . Chairman, I feel that the honourable member is taking a newspaper

article which in fact may have distorted the picture anyway, and is further distorting the picture. If he wishes to do so, he's certainly quite free to do that, Mr. Chairman, but I say it flies in the face of the facts. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Burro ws. 2697

Monday, 13 April, 1981 MR. BEN HANUSCHAK: Just a couple of points that I wish to make with respect to this item in the Estimates. As you may have noticed, Mr. Chairman, in today's paper, the Prog ressive party did indicate its position, or the general thrust or direction in which it intends to move, insofar as post-seconda ry education is concerned. One of the points that we made is for the provision of post-se cond ary edu cation on the same basis as pu blic school educ ation is provided, namely, educat ion being universally accessible, no fee being charged to the student.

Now I mention that under Student Aid, Mr . Chairman, because this is part of a student cost at the present time. The tuition fee is one of the cost items that certainly is included in the determining level of support that a student is entitled to. So we do bel ieve in post-second ary education being universally accessible. With that being our ultimate goal and in working toward that goal, we would look at the removal of tuition fees. We would also take ·a look at the cost of textbooks, which is another major cost item to the student at the present time. I would suspect, Mr.

Chairman, tuition fees, you're looking at $670 I think are the lowest fees that are propos ed for the forthcoming academic year in the Faculty of Social Work and the Faculty of Arts, ranging up to $1 ,260 for Dentistry and Medicine. So that would be a substantial savings to all students. Textbooks are also provided, the provision of free textbooks also provide a subsiantial saving to students because I would suspect that there again it would vary from faculty to faculty but in some faculties a student might spend upwards of well over $300, $350 a year on textbooks.

If you take into account the fact that there may be some texts that a student may not see any particular need for to own personally and at the end of the year he will surrender them in the same manner as he surrenders a high school textbook at the present time. So, therefore taken into account the reusability factor of the text, the fact that they will not have to be replaced every year, I would think that the cost would be $1 million, $2 million a year, probably somewhere in that order.

With a view to moving toward univ ersal accessibility I would also take a look at the cost of transportation that students have to incur to get to and from un iversity.

Student employment, rather than the cumbersome process of student aid, and the auditing and the discovering if there is a certain amount of leakage and so forth and recovering what the department mi!;ht consider to be overpayment to some students; rather than enrich a student aid program which, by the way, this government has not really enriche d because if you comp are, if you compa re the Student Aid Pr ogram for the forthcoming fiscal year with that in 77-78, I want to remind you, Mr. Chairman, that 19 77-78, the Student Aid Program was $5. 1 millio n.

Even takin g into account the decline in enrolment over the past while, but it hasn't been all that great, that is the decline; but 5. 1 million of 19 77-78 dollars would bring you up to well over $7.5 million in terms of 81 -82 dollars. So, the program isn't as rich, is considerably leaner I would think in this fiscal year than it was four years ago.

So, rather than go through the whole process of applying for student aid and checking student aid 2698 appli cations and auditing student aid applications and chasing after students that the go vernment might feel were paid too much, I would much rather take the simpler route, when we're talking about tuition fees, we're talking about 10 percent of the university's operating costs because the public purse at the present time picks up close to 90 percent anyway through the gr ants tha t the Grants Commission pays the universities.

So, rather than go the present cumbersome route, make education at the post-secondary level uni versity accessible and the same way as it is up to Grade 12 and let the universities set their admission requirements on the basis of th

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-5-57a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 5th hansardpdf 57a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	c4a89b97f6391ae79e2ce5989ccf5194535604f3

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