Manitoba Hansard — 13 May 1987 (Sitting 47, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-47

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 13 May, 1987. Time - 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Philli ps: Pr esenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Sp ecial Committees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Urban Affairs. HON. G. DOER: Madam Speak er, I'd like to table the Suppleme ntary Information for Legislative Review for this year's 19 87-88 Department of Crown Investments Estimates. MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motions . . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS HON. M. SMITH introduced, by leave, Bill No. 31,

An Act to amend The Community Child Day Care Standards Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les garderies d'enfants. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have 60 students from Grade 9 from the John Pritchard School under the direction of Mr. Murray Lampert. The school is located in the cons tituency of the Honourable Member for River East. We have 22 students from Grade 8 from the Leaf Rap ids School un der th e direction of Mr . Bruc e Backhouse. The school is located in the cons tituency of the Honour able Mini ster for Co-op Develo pment.

On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this afternoon. Members will also note the presence at the Table toda y of Miss Sandra Clive, the Clerk of Committees. Miss Clive will be sitting at the Table in future on a regular rotational basis to familiarize herself with House procedures, and to enhance her procedural knowledge by observing and assisting the Clerk and the Deputy Clerk with certain of their duties. The intent is to provide the House with a qua lified back-up Table Officer in the event of the una voidable absence of either the Clerk or the Deputy Clerk.

ORAL QUESTIONS The Labour Relations Act - provisions which caused lawsuit MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, my question is for the Prem ier.

I wonder if he can indicate whether or not he has investigated the circumstances under which an 18-year old woman has been slapped with a $3.2 million lawsuit by Bernie Christophe and the Manitoba Food and Commer cial Workers' Union because she had the audacity to send a letter around to her fellow employees at Supervalu asking questions about the position of the union and the position of the management in a labour dispute in which they're engaged. Has he looked into the insane provisions of The Manitoba Labour Relations Act that have caused this lawsuit to be lodged against this young woman?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, first, I have found out, and I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition will be pleased to know, because this was my principal concern in hearing the story, that there is no intent to, in a monetary fashion, create any penalties; so there is no $3.2 million lawsuit against Jennifer Campbell, nor any intent to penalize in a monetary fashion, one, Jennifer Campbell. I'm very pleased in fact that that has been clarified by the union themselves.

The Leader of the Opposition makes reference to insane labour relations provisions and I'm not sure what the Leader of the Opposition is referring to. Sections 6.(1) an d 6.(2) of The Labour Relations Act are reasonable and are certainly quite in order, dealing with unfair labour practice, and ensuring that in the process of organizing, in the process of negotiation, that the members of a union, in fact, do that without interf erence by the emplo yer or someone acting on behalf of the emplo yer, or at the institution of the empl oyer.

That is a matter that will be before the Labour Board and I think it would serve everyone's interests to ascertain whether or not that, indeed, did take place in the case that is before us current ly. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, the insane provisions that I've referred to are those that have caused her to be slapped with a $3.2 million lawsuit as a result of asking questions, such as: If the negotiations resulted in a strike vote, what would the advantage of a strike be; what would the disadvantage of a strike be? Labour Board - intercede re penalty to Jennifer Campbell MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker , in view of the fact that the head of the Ma nitoba Food and Commercial Workers' Union, Mr. Christophe, has said that he has not withdrawn the suit; that in fact the relief requested, the $3.2 million, is in the normal form used in Labour Board applications, and it will be up to the board to decide whether or not $3.2 million is awarded, is the 1989

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 First Min ister saying that he will int ercede with the board and instruct them not to award a damage penalty against Jenni fer Campbell? HON. H. PAWLEY: I notice, Madam Speak er, that we are being suggested to do something that, in fact, has been frowned upon for years and years in this Chamb er, for a government to intervene on matters involving parties before jud icial or qu asi jud icial boards of government. That has generally been accepted to be political in terference, unfair in terference, untoward in terference on the part of government to do that.

And yet, we've had the suggestion by the Member for Brandon West about two weeks ago that the Min ister of Labour intervene in a Labour Board adjudication; we have the suggestion today -from the Leader of the Opposition himself -that we intervene in a matter that is being dealt with insofar as its merits before the Labour Board - a Labour Board that is com posed of a representative of labour , a repres entativ e of business, and a chairperson that is neither representative of labour or the business commun ity.

I think that is a fair and appropriate way, rather than for us to engage in political grandstanding in respect to this matter . Save it, that there is no intent, from the information I have, to slap any $3.2 million penalty against any 18-year old girl. Campbell, Jennifer - protection of freedom of speech MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, in view of the fact that Mr.

Christophe is quoted as saying that he will not withdraw this $3.2 million lawsuit; and, in view of the fact that the Premier will not instruct the Labour Board not to award a $3.2 million penalty against Jenn ifer Campbell, how then will he protect her freedom of speech and her right to be heard on a labour issue such as this, without being threatened and intim idated by a $3.2 million lawsuit? HON. H. PAWLEY: The Leader of the Opposition should insure that his facts are accurate.

It is certainly my information that the union has indica ted very clearly that it has not been their intent, nor is it their intent now, to slap one, Jennifer Campbell, with a $3.2 million lawsuit; that it is not their intent to cause her monetary damage. What, in fact, we must do in this case is do what is normal and reason able, and permit the board to ascertain whether or not, under the provisions of the act, there is an unfair labour practice charge.

Otherwise, what the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting we do is ever ytime there is a case in which it is inf erred that there is company int erve ntion, directly or ind irectly, that we run to the rescue of those who are defending such a charge, and not permit the matter to be dealt with objectively and clearly and without prejudice by the quasi judicial board that has been charged with the responsibil ity for hearing the matter. MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speak er, I regret that the Premier will not intervene to remove the threat of this $3.2 million lawsuit against Jennifer Campbell, the 18- year-old woman who has had her freedom of speech threatened. And speaking of threat and intimidation, Madam Speaker, my question is to the Mini ster of Culture and Recreat ion. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable First Mini ster on a point of order. HON. H. PAWLEY: I reserve the right, when the Leader of the Opposition responds by way of

preamble to an ans wer that I've given, then redir ects his question to another Minister - I have a basic resp onsibility and a right, Madam Speak er, to respond to a prea mble which relates to the answer that I gave earlier. The

preamble should not be allo wed. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Ord er. Order please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. Businesses intimidated by government staff MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speak er, speaking of threats and intimidation, I wonder if the Mini ster of Cult ure, Heritage and Recreat ion has yet inv estigated the actions of a senior bureaucrat in her depar tme nt, who threatened and intimidated the head of an advertising agency, one, Peter Stringham, of Stringham and Grant Ta ndy, and said earlier, and I quote: "My Min ister will have to come down hard on you if this is brought up in the Legislature." Has she inv estigated that matter, and has she, in fact, identified the ind ividual inv olved and reprimanded him for his actions? HON. H.

PAWLEY: I'm extremely disappointed that the Leader of the Opposition is determined to prejudge a matter that is before a judicial body, the Labour Board of the Province of Man itoba. The Leader of the Opposition wants us to prejudge a case. He's made that very, very clear by way of his

preamble to the question to the Mini ster of Cultur al Affairs. Madam Speak er, it's cont rary, totally contr ary to every practice, to become involved and prejudge a case that's before a quasi-judicial body in the Province of Manitoba. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, I just want to get the threat of a $3.2 million lawsuit off the back of 18 - year old Jenn ifer Campbell. That's all I want. MADAM SPEAKER: May I remind both sides of the House that question period is not a time for debate. Businesses intimidated by government staff MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition with a question. MR. G.

FILMON: Will the Mini ster of Culture, Heritage and Recreation indicate whether she's investigated the ma tter , and identified the senior civil servant who 1990

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 threatened and intimi dated the head of an advertising agency? Has she reprimanded that civil servant? HON. H. PAWLEY: In response to the

preamble by the Leader of the Opposition, we have received clear informa tion, which I del ivered to this House. It is not the intent to slap any 18 -year-old with a $3.2 million lawsuit. The Leader of the Opposition should not misrepresent that fact to this House. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, Mr. Christophe clearly is quoted today as saying he will not remove that suit. My question to the Min ister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation is: Will she identify and reprimand the culprit in her department who is threatening and intimida ting the head of an advertising agency?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourabl e Mi nister of Culture and Heritage Resources. HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Thank you, Ma dam Speaker. As I clearly ind icated yesterd ay, we on this side of the House reject enti rely the kind of innuendo and remarks made by the Leader of the Opposition. There were no threats and no intimida tion and, let the record show that the Leader of the Opposition has just not gotten the facts straight. As I said yesterday, I certainly would look into the matter and I have. I have discussed the matter with the official inv olved and can clearly indic ate that the quotation was taken out of context.

Members opposite should know, if they don't already know, that it is not my policy , nor the policy of any of my colleagues on this side of the House, to come down heavy on anyone in our communities. My colleagues and I have always encouraged the most open opportunities imaginable for su bmissions and for awards of contracts.

Final ly, Madam Speak er, let me say, as the Premier indi cated yesterd ay, the demise of this agency is widely known thr oughout Winnipeg, if not Manitoba, a result of a loss of a major contra ct with the Federal Government when the government cha nged from Liberal to Cons ervative and, acc ordin g to other information, the result of a loss of a major contract in another sector of the economy . So I think the Leader of the Opposition should get his facts straight before he makes such derogatory statements. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speak er, is the Mini ster now saying that Mr .

Stringham was lying when he said he was told, by a senior official in her department, I might indi cate a senior official who was responsible for allocating contracts to advertising agencies on behalf of this government, is she saying that he lied when he quoted this official as saying, and I quote, "My Min ister will have to come down hard on you if this is brought up in the Legislature." MR. H. ENNS: How do you take that out of context? He hands out the advert is in g con tract for the government. HON. J.

WASYLYCI A-LEIS: The Leader of the Opposition continues to distort this issue and make 1991 suggestions that are just not founded in fact. I have ind icated that the official invol ved was misquoted, and I have ind icated yesterday that if anything was said, and I believe it was said in this way, that there is no relationship between the situation of this particular advertising agency and the economic climate of this province, then I think those matters have to be stated by members in this House as well as by staff involved.

Interest Rate Reduction Program - calculation of and fee charged MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. G. FINDLAY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Min ister of Agriculture. Some information has recently been sent to all MACC clients about the MACC Interest Rate Reduction Program. In this information, Madam Speaker, that was sent to all clients, I would like to ask the Mini ster why MACC did not ind icate to the clients how the In terest Rate Reduction Program is calculated and what the fee actually is? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B.

URUSKI: Madam Speaker, I will look at the letter that was sent. A letter was sent, and would have been sent to those clients who would have long-terms loans with the corporation; not all clients of MACC would have, in fact, received the letter because there would be a number of clients who would have short-term loans where the buy-down program would have had a little or no impa ct in terms of their saving. I've ind icated that in the House. When I announced the program, it was those farmers who would have had a longer-term repayment.

Ma dam Speaker, the program pointed out that the buydown would be to a rate from the present rate that the mor tgage was at, and there would be mortgages as high as 13 percent; the buydown would be to 8 percent and would be fin anced in several ways -either a cash payment; either a loan for a shorter period of time; or a loan up to a maximum of 15 years. On the basis of the loan for 15 years, the current interest rate that the corporation borrows at would be used to finance the buydown, and that would be what the communication should have read.

If there is something in the letter, or a letter that the honourable member has received, that is not clear, I wish he would bring it to my attention and we'd certainly want to look at that question. MR. G. FINDLAY: I would ask the Mini ster then to let all clients know how the fee is calculated. Interest reduction fee - income tax deductible on 1987 tax return MR. G. FINDLAY: I would like to ask the Minister, in addition, would he tell the House whether, if a farmer pays his inter est rate reduction fee this year, is it considered a fully deductible cash expense for his 1987 income tax return?

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, I guess I can 't answer for Revenue Canada in terms of how they calculate income tax returns on expenses. I would assume that an expense made, and on the cash system , would be in fact calculable toward one's mortgage payments. as would normally be deducted, but that should be cleared through Revenue Canada because we are not the agency to assess that .

Madam Speaker, let it be clear, when I announced the program, if the buydown is taken by virtue of a loan to make up the payment for the buydown, the interest rate currently charged by the corporation for the period of the buydown is the rate that is used for the cost of the buydown ; and it is basically tacked on to the end of the mortgage or as part of the mortgage. It is those two fees , the reduced payment by virtue of the 8 percent mortgage, and the increased cost of the buydown, and the difference between is what the farmer saves in terms of his overall payments.

That was basically the debate we had during my Estimates and the knowledge, or the statement about how the program is financed, continues to be the same. Drought - contingency plans MR. G. FINDLAY: A new question to the same Minister.

Given that Manitoba and Western Canada and a large portion of the United States have received very little or no rainfall this spring, and it's obvious that a severe drought is imminent if something doesn't happen in the next three to four weeks , I would like to ask the Minister what contingency plans he has in place , or is prepared to put in place, to deal with a severe drought, if it should occur in Manitoba in 1987? HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, I have asked our staff in our department to monitor the situation very closely, and indeed we have concerns that may occur.

However, at this point in time, it would be premature to say that this is what the contingency plans will be. We're monitoring the system very closely as to what might occur, it's everyone 's hope I'm sure, including honourable members opposite that all of Canada, and Western Canada in particular, receive at least an inch or two of rain over the next two or three weeks and make sure that the crops that have been seeded to date will in fact grow to maturity, and that farmers can realize at harvest time what all of us are hoping and praying for.

Manitoba Lotteries Foundation - conflict-of-interest guidelines MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Charleswood . MR. J. ERNST: Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation. Madam Speaker, last week I asked the Mini ster if there was a conflict-of-interest policy in place for Manitoba Lotte ries Foundation employees and the Minister kindly provided me with the

schedule of those conflict-of-interest guidelines . I also asked at that time, Madam Speaker , if there was a conflict-of-interest policy for umb rella groups . The Minister did not respond at that time, perhaps she can respond now? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister responsible for Lotteries . HON. J. WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

As I indicated to the Member for Charleswood privately, there is not a policy that we have handed down to each umbrella group for confl ict of interest; however, each umbrella group has the responsibility for determining and putting in place its own set of operating procedures and no doubt, in many cases, umbrella groups have conflict-of-interest policies, but it is quite a separate matter from the question of a conflict-of-interest policy for staff at the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation. Manitoba High School Athletic Association - Ex. Dir. role in distribution of funds MR. J.

ERNST: Madam Speaker, I have a new question to the Minister . The Manitoba High School Athletic Association receives in excess of $200,000 in lottery funds, both from the Manitoba Sports Federation umbrella and also through the ir own direct bingo dates . Could the Minister advise if the executive director of that association would have any major role to play in the distribution of funds generated from those sources? HON. J.

WASYLYCIA-LEIS: Madam Speaker, as I just indicated each umbrella group is responsible for putting in place its own set of procedures and for determining how decisions are made with respect to grants . We respect the arm's-length relationship between each umbrella group and the Government of Manitoba , and it is not our role to interfere on a daily basis.

However, Madam Speaker, as I've indicated previously to this House and to groups concerned , we are in the process of putting in place a needs assessment that will review the current distribution system , and will review the operating policies and the administrative practices of each umbrella group . And it would be through that needs assessment that we would have the opportunity for groups to raise these concerns and for each umbrella group to put in place practices that are responsive to the concerns raised. 1992 Value Checks, fundraiser for MHSAA - investigate violation of guidelines re Lotteries employees MR.

J. ERNST: Madam Speaker , we're dealing with hundreds of thousands , millions indeed , of dollars of lottery revenues , coming forward and, in this situation the executive director of the Manitoba High School Sports Federation is in fact the sole director and president of a company called Jim Enterprises Ltd. Jim Enterprises markets and produces a book , Madam Speaker, called "Value Checks." Value Checks is indicated as the official fund raiser of the Manitoba High

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 School Athletic Asso ciation . Ma dam Speak er, this clearly violates the guidelines expressed for Manitoba Lottery Founda tion employees under Clause 3 where they cannot use their own position , as an employee, to generate business pri vately. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J. ERNST: Madam Speak er, the situation is this: Will the Min ister investigate the situation to determine if, in fact, Lotteries funding is being used to fund the private business of this gentleman? HON. J.

WASVL YCIA -LEIS: Ma dam Speaker , the Member for Char leswood certainly raises an important matter. I've already spoken to staff at the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation about this particular incident, and will be looking into it further to see what action can be taken on my part. I certainly would encourage all umb rella groups to put in place conflict-of-interest policy, to deal with situations just like this one tha t the Me mber for Charleswood has brought to our attention.

I would also hope that, through this fairly major endeavour of a needs assessment of all of the entire lottery distribution system, that we will be able to address these questions in a meaningful way and end up with a refined and more effective distribution system. Disability pensions - welfare recipients MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speak er. My question is to the Minis ter of Employment Services. In January of 1987, the disability pensions under the Canada Pension Plan were incr eased by $15 2 a month.

Tr agica lly, the only indi viduals who do not benefit under this provision are those who are in receipt of welfare. Would the Min ister tell the House whether Manitoba is prepared to accept the new recommendations of the Min ister of Health, which would, in fact, deem these benefits to be expenses related to their disabil ity, not income and, the refore, would entitle them to receive the appropriate welfare benefit? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Employment Services and Economic Securit y. HON. L. EVANS: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I welcome that question from the Honourable Member for River Heights.

Indeed, it is a very important question, and one that has to be add ressed, as it is being addr essed, by the Federal Government. Because, Mada m Speak er, under the present Canada Assistance Plan Regulations, none of the provinces can do what the Member for River Heights is suggest ing. The member alludes to a statement, I believe, by the Hon ourable Jake Epp. He has made a public statement saying that he has written to the provinces in this regard. I might advise mem bers that we have not received any repr esentation in this ma tter whatsoever by th e Ho nourable Min ister.

So we're looking forward to hearing from him. I think that this is a matter that we should consider in a posit ive light. Social Assistance Program in Manitoba - conf lict with Charter or Rights MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A supplementary question to the same Min ister. Will the Mini ster be introducing, in this Session of the Hous e,

an act to end our two-tiered Social Assistance Program in Manitoba, thereby ending a conflict which exists with the Charter of Rights? HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speak er, this is a matter that has been under consideration by myself and by our government for some time. I would hope to be able to ind icate a government intention in this matter in the near future. But I want to advise the honourable member that all the solutions in welfare, all the difficulties we have in the welfare system, do not vanish once you have a one-tier system.

Because I could point to one-tier systems across this country where welfare people are treated very shabbily, Madam Speaker. I would just mention tha t in the Province of Saskatchewan now, with regard to CPP disabil ity, the Government of Saskatchewan is requiring CPP disability recipients to claim th ose monies so th at the Saskatchewan Government does not have to pay it out in the form of welfare.-(Interjection)- Madam Speaker, that is not correct. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, the Mini ster of Health, Mr.

Epp, wrote to us to ensure that we would not encourage welfare recipients to go to the Federal Government and get the CPP benefits. We said that we would do that. We would not force our recipients to do that. Madam Speaker, regrettably the Province of Saskatchewan is doing this, this very day. Sexist language - removal from social assistance legislation MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A final supplementary question to the same Min ister on a Manitoba problem.

Madam Speaker, will the Mini ster introduce legislation in this Session which will remove sexist langua ge which in fact discrim inates against both males and females within our society from all social assistance legislation? HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, we'll have to look at the legislation. I'm not clear precisely what the member is referring to and I would appreciate getting some detail from her at some point. I might mention though, Ma dam Speaker , th at un like many other provinces, we treat fathers and mothers the same. We not only have mother's allo wances in Manitoba, we have father's al lowances.

We've removed any sexist approach in that respect. Well, that's very important because I think the fathers are entitled to the same treatment that mothers are under a social allo wance program. 1993

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Awasis Agency - criminal charges re sexual assault MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert . MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you , Madam Speaker . I have a question for the Attorney-General. Nearly two months ago , I asked him whether criminal charges would be laid in the case of the 14-year -old girl who was involved with the Awasis Agency and was allegedly sexually assaulted and rape d. Could the Attorney-General indicate if charges have been laid and, if not, what is the reason for the delay? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R.

PENNER: Yes, well, I'll give it a stra ightforward answer in that case . The matter was and still is under investigation by the RCMP. Whether or not the RCMP report has been forwarded in its final form to the Crown prosecutor in Thompson is not known to me as of today, but I'll take the question as notice and advise the member and the House tomorrow . Legal Aid - application for certificate to sue Awasis Agency MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speaker , I also asked the Attorney-General, relative to that matter, whethe r he would assist in the granting of a Legal Aid Certificate to the family and the young girl to seek compensation in this matter . He indicated that he would await the decision of the Legal Aid Board. Could he indicate whether that matter has been considered by the Legal Aid Board and whether a certificate will be granted to provide a lawyer for the family and the young girl to seek compensation in that matter? HON. R.

PENNER: Certainly , I think you'll recall indicating at the time that it was my view that if an application for legal aid was made by or on behalf of the young woman in question that it ought to be within the rules and regulations of legal aid, ought to be dealt with positively . I'm not aware that an application has been made or, if an application has been made, if it's been dealt with , but I'll certainly take that as notice as well. Bank of Nova Scotia - head office to Calgary MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker , a new question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology.

I would ask him whether he has had any conversa tions with officials of the Bank of Nova Scotia, or has any knowledge about the Bank of Nova Scotia moving its head office to Calgary and reducing their staff from 40 to 8 in the city? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry , Trade and Technology. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I'll take the question as notice in terms of the department, but I heard some noise from the peanut gallery about employment in the province .

I would remind members on that side that Manitoba has the strongest employment growth of any province in Western Canada over the last year and over the last number of years. We have 7,000 more people working here today than we had last year. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Co-op Implements - additional support MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member fo r La Verendrye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Cooperative Development. Could he tell us why Co-op Implements needs an additional $12 million of taxpayers ' support, of which $2.5 million is Man itoba's share?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co op Development. HON. J. COWAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker . Unfortunately, the Member for La Verend rye is obtaining some of his facts from a press

article that was not entirely correct, so let me take one moment to explain what the agreement is so that he has a full understa ndi ng. In essence, what has happened is Saskatchewan , Alberta, Manitoba and the Federal Government have entered into negotiations and finalized successfully negotiations with Co-operat ive Implements and Vicon to bring to an end an agreement which members of his party entered into in 1978, which provided for $12 .5 million in loan guarantees .

So what we are doing now is to end that agreement, and we have struck an arrangement whereby Vicon itself and C.I. will assume responsibility for 50 percent of those loan guarantees and the prairie prov inces , along with the Federal Government, will assume responsibility for the other 50 percent of those guarantees with the proviso that, if Vicon and C.I. are profitable over the next number of years, they will return that 50 percent which we paid out. In Manitoba 's instance, that 50 percent amounts to $1 .4 million of a write-off of a loan guarantee that has been around for far too many years.

We're doing it now at this time, Madam Speaker, because we are encouraged by what Vicon and Co-o p Implements have been able to do over the past year by working together to serve rural comm unities , to provide jobs, to protect the farm implementation industry in Manitoba . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. J. COWAN: ... and, Madam Speaker , we're proud of that agreement. MR. H.

PANKRATZ: In view of this lengthy statement that the Minister made , I'd like to go on a report of February 5, 1987, from the Manitoba Co-operator which stat es, and I'll read as follows: " Net income of $2.36 1994

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 million for 198 6 was reported by Co-op Implements, the Winni peg-based farm machinery cooperative. This is a dramatic turnaround in the position of Co-op Implements," said Vic Kuttner , Chief Executive Officer. My question is to the Minis ter again: Is that report not accurate and, if such, is he totally informed as to the position of Co-op Imp lements? HON. J. COWAN: The Member for La Verendrye is not disappointed at the success of Co-operative Implements.

One of the reasons they have been able to be successful is not only due to their hard work -and they have worked hard, and the support of their 24,000 cooperative members and they have worked hard and shown commitment and dedication -but also because a Provincial Government and a Federal Government and two other Provincial Governments sat down with them and said, how can we make this farm implement manufacturing indus try and distribution network work better for the farmers, work better for rural Manitoba, work better for the Prairie Provinces, and when that happens, when the farmers benefit, when the workers benefit, all of Manitoba benefits and we're proud to be a part, a small part, albeit, but a part of that turnaround, Madam Sp eaker.

And what we did just the other day will ensure that we are finalizing a reliance on the part of Vicon and Co-op on the government and at the same time poising them for continued success and a better future for all of us. Vicon - amount of total loans and loan guarantees MR. H. PANKRATZ: My final question to the Minister: What is the total amount of loan gua rantees and the outstanding loans that Vicon has at the present and have they lived up to their present commitments and would he be willing to table this in the House? HON. J.

COWAN: I would just have to seek some clarification from the Member for La Verendrye. Is he asking for the agreement to be tabled in the House? MR. H. PANKRATZ: Madam Sp eaker, I would like the Mini ster to table all previous agreements and loan guaran tees that have been made by the Province of Ma nitoba. HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker, I believe the origina l agreement in 1978 was tabled in the House but if the Cons ervative Government of the Day neglected to do so, we will certainly do so. We have made all the other agreements public.

As a matter of fact, I believe the Member for La Verendrye should be in receipt of this particular agreement that was just recently negotiated and signed because I had it sent to his office this morning. If he wishes me to table in the House, I can do that, there's absolutely no difficulty, we've already made it public in many different ways.

I would be proud to because it provides, Madam Speaker, for a better future for Co-op Implements and Vicon, it provides for pay equity provisions, it provides for affirmative action, it provides for job secur ity, It provides for economic spinoffs, it provides for a stronger farm imp lementation manufacturing ind ustry, a stronger distribution network, stronger rural communities and it does all that while having Vicon and Co-op assume 50 percent of the responsibility that we had previously and then promises to pay it back to us if they'r e profitable. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please.

The Honou rable Member for Brandon West. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speak er, the Minis ter of Cooperative Development doesn 't get very many opportunities to answer questions about his portfolio in the House. I guess that's why his answers are so long. MADAM SPEAKER: Question? Conditions for bailing out companies in future MR. J. McCRAE: Part of the deal, Ma dam Speaker, was tha t the Mani toba Government obtained a guarantee from Co-op Imp lements that comparable value, sometimes called pay equity, and affirmative act ion, would be part of the deal.

Is it the policy of the government that comparable value and affirmative action will be a condition for bailing out companies in the future or for doing business with this government? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co op Development. HON. J. COWAN: I had the opportunity to read back thr ough the 19 78 Ha nsards when Mr.

Cra ik was addressing this issue in the House when they made that 1978 loan guarantee agreement and I can't recall having heard the word, "bail-out." It certainly wasn't a bail-out then and it's not a bail-out now, it is a progressive agreement that provides for assistance to an ind ustry that Is provi ding a strong service for rural Manitoba to an area of Manitoba that that member represents, and I think he should take some pride in it.

In respect to pay equ ity, Madam Speaker, it is part of a development agreement, along with affirmative action, along with job guarantees, and along with economic sp inoffs, and the best efforts being utilized to obtain those in Manitoba. Manitoba negotiated those when the other Prairie Provinces could not or would not. So we stand alone in that regard, and we're quite proud of what we were able to negotiate.

No, it is not a condition of any agreemen t we enter into; perhaps it should be; but it certainly is something that we want to negotiate when we have a progressive company like Co-op Implements, the cooperative movement being progressive, and Vicon, who want to work with us to provide better quality jobs for their workers, and to ensure that women and those who have been economically disa dvantaged in this province, through no fault of their own, have a fair share at the work opportunities we're creating by working together. 1995

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Manitoba Labour Law - in compliance with Charter of Rights MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speak er, this question is directed to the Attorney-General. On Monday of this week, the Attorney-General said that The Manitoba Labour Relations Act has been undergoing scrutiny for Char ter of Rights compliance. When will that opinion be ready? Will the Minister make available to honourable mem bers of this House the opinion of the law officers of the Crown regarding the Charter compliance of The Manitoba Labour Relations Act? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R.

PENNER: What I said was that in connection with an action by Metropolitan Stores and others challenging our labour legislation, the Legal Department of the Constitutional Law Department of the Attorney General were, in fact, briefing the whole relati onship between the labour legislation gen erally, our Labour Relations Act in particul ar, and the Charter of Rights. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. HON. R. PENNER: If you'd be a little patient, which is not one of your better qualities, I'll complete my answer. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Could we please stay on the topic? The Honourable Attorney-General on the question. HON. R. PENNER: In fact, Ma dam Speak er , in relati onship to questions that were asked earlier today about an action taken by a union, I should point out that

Section 23 of The Labour Relations Act, has a strong clause with respect to freedom of speech which has been used successfully, I'm glad to say, in cases where it's a borderline situation between unfair labour practice and the right of freedom of speech. We have those provisions in what is one of the best, if not the best Labour Relations Acts in the count ry. What I said, if the Leader of the Opposition would have listened, is that year-by-year for the last three years, we have been subjecting all of our statutes to an analysis with respect to the Charter of Rights.

We have brought in the best legislation in the country in terms of compliance, and there will be another bill this year that will do the same thing. The Labour Relations Act - opinion from law officers re freedom of speech MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker , this is the Min ister who complains about being taken out of context all the time, and he won't answer my question. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J.

McCRAE: In addition to making availabl e the opinion of the law officers of the Crown, two honourable members in this Cham ber, will the Minister seek also an opinion from the same law officers regarding any provision in The Manitoba Labour Relations Act which allows an 18 -year-old empl oyee to be liable for the payment of millions of dollars under the

section dealing with penalties for unfair labour practices, which is legislation put in by this govern ment, and such unfair labour practices as expressing thems elves through freedom of speech and expression? Will you table the opinion? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, Madam Speaker, of course. Legal opinions prepared for a court case by the Department of the Attorney-General are the property of the people of Manitoba and certainly its Legislatures, and ... MR. G. FILMON: For the legislation, that's what we asked for. MR. J. McCRAE: Review of the legislation, you know what I'm talking about, answer the question, please.

HON. R. PENNER: Madam Speaker, I'll continue with my answer. That opinion certainly is available, No. 1. No. 2, with respect to the Member for Brandon West, harkening back to the original set of questions in this Chambe r, the fact that someone chooses, as they allege, to file a complaint under the act and ask for X or Y or Z is a tar cry from that, in fact, being available under the legislation and being allowed by the Labour Board.

The mem bers opposite should recall -although they choose to forget - that the Labour Board is composed of equal num bers of emp loyer representatives and empl oyee representatives, and they should not, for a moment, think that its adjudic ations have been weighed in one direction or the other; they haven't. If that's the in ference, then it's an unfair criticism and an unwarranted criticism of the Labour Board, and an unfair criticism of representatives of employers' groups who sit on that Labour Board, just as much as representativ es of empl oyees' groups.

MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: May I draw the attention of honou rable members to the Speaker's gallery where we have the pleasure of having with us this afternoon His Excellency, the Ambassador of Ireland to Canada, Mr . Sean Gaynor and Mrs. Gaynor . On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the legislature today. Also in the gallery we have 56 students from Grade 9 from the Gabr ielle Roy Scho ol. The students are under the direction of Mr . A. Jobinville and the school is located in the constituency of the Honour able Member for Emerson.

I also unde rstand they'r e accompan ied by an exchange class from the Province of Quebec. On behalf of all the memb ers, we welcome you to the legislature. 1996

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Lead er. HON. J. COWAN: Yes, Madam Speaker , would you please Second Readings in the following order: Bills No. 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, and then please call Bill No. 15; then the Debate on Second Readings, the Adjourned Debate, on Bill No. 6. It's my understanding that there's an inclination on the part of all members to forego Private Mem bers' Hour , by leave, and if we complete the Debate on Second Readings, we would then move the necessary motion to move us into Comm ittee of Supply for review of Estimates.

MADAM SPEAKER: Is it the will of the House to dispense with Private Members' Hour? (Agreed) SECOND READING BILL NO. 23 - THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT HON. J. PLOHMAN presented Bill No. 23,

An Act to amend The Hig hway Traffic Act, for Second Reading. MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Hig hways and Tr ansportation. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speak er, it is my honour to present for Second Read ing, amendments to The Highway Tr affic Act. I do have a copy of the opening remarks, if the members would like to have a copy.

Madam Speaker, many of the amendments that are being introduced here in the Legislature today serve to streamline the operations within my department and also correspond to cost-saving init iatives that have been un dertaken this year through the Estimates process. In addition, modifications have been made to certain sections ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. If honourable members would like to have private conversations, could they please do so elsewhere? The Honourable Mini ster. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker , I appreciate that int ervention .

No w, I was saying that many of these modifications ha ve been made to certain sections in order to more accurately reflect the spirit, intent and the practice under the act at the present time. One of the cost-saving init iatives that I referred to will result in issuing single licence plates for motor vehicles. The existing act requires, Madam Speaker, that two-num ber plates be displayed on most vehicles in the Province of Manitoba, with the exception of motorcycles, mopeds and trailers. The proposed amendment will require that only one plate be displayed on the rear of all motor vehicles.

It is the rear plate that is most visible in the case of traffic enforcement and the plate to which the registration decal is affixed. Manitoba is the third province in Canada to adopt the practice of issuing single licence plates. The policy has already been established in Quebec and Prince Edward Island and about 20 states in the U.S. This new policy is expected to represent a $210,0 00 ann ual reduction in expenditures, something that tends to be ignored by the members of the Opposition who have opposed this move.

An additional $1. 6 million will be saved when licence plates are completely re-issued which happens every seven or eight years traditiona lly in the province. We've also in corporated change s to the act concerning dr iver licence suspensions involving the Medic al Review Commit tee. The Registrar of Motor Vehicles will continue to be legally empowered to suspend a dr iver, pending receipt of a med ical certificate, if the driver is believed to pose a serious threat to the public safety. As well, a

section of the act which specifies that a driver who does not have a medical certificate could appeal the Registrar's suspension before the Medical Review Committee is being repealed. Obviously, the commit tee could not make a decision to revoke a suspension based on medical reasons, if there was no medica l in formation to consi der. Yet the present provisions of the act enable a person to appeal to the Medical Review Commi ttee even though they do not necessarily have a medical certificate. In practice, that's not happening.

So, on that basis, we propose to change the act to ensure a practical application of procedures which will protect the interest and safety of all motorists. The cha nges will correct the inconsi stencies which exist between the cur rent legislation and the present practice of the Manitoba Medi cal Review Comm ittee. Another amendment has been made in response to the request of the RCMP and the Winnip eg City Police. The amended act will allow red and blue lights to be used on law enforcement vehicles. The existing act only allows for red lights to be displayed on these types of vehicles.

The combination of red and blue lights on law enforcement vehicles will ma ke them easier to distinguish from other emergency vehicles for the public. These changes will also bring about a greater degree of national uniform ity, since eight jurisdictions in Canada curren tly have a policy in place to allow the use of red and blue lights exclusively on law enforcement vehicles.

I might mention that we've had requests for the same consideration for ambulances and firetrucks, but we have stuck at this point, Madam Speaker, to the national standard which has been agreed to, as of the 1981 Conference of the Motor Tr ansport Admi nistra tors and the Ministers responsible, to providing this only for law enforcement vehicles. In addition, Madam Speak er, we are putting forward a provision that would provide a clear definition of the authority of peace officers to stop vehicles in order to check dri vers licences and vehicle registration cards.

Random stopping of motorists is often the only means of apprehending indi viduals who are driving while disqualified. Yet at the current time the law enforcement officers do not have a clear jurisdiction to stop a vehicle just for the purp oses of checking the drivers licences and vehicle registration cards. The inclusion of this provision will ensure that such action is justifiable under the Charter of Rights, and we have been very careful in doing that. 1997

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Criminal Code offences under The Highway Tr affic Act presently calf for a six-month suspension for a first conviction and a five-year suspension for a second or subsequent conviction within a five-year period. Some people, who have two or more Criminal Code offences under the current system, are intentionally delaying their court appearances, Madam Speaker , for their first offence in an attempt to have all charges dealt with at the same cour t appearance, thus av oiding the im position of a five-year suspension, a technicality that they've been able to work to their advantage.

The amendment would clearly enable the Registrar to treat all persons consistently by imposing a five year suspension. It's a technicality that they've been able to work to their advantage. The amendment would clearly enable the Registrar to treat all persons consistently by imposing a five-year suspension when a person commits two or more Criminal Code driving offences within five years, regardless of the actual dates of conviction. This amendment will ensure that the clear intent of the original clause can be carried out as was intended when dealing with these serious convictions.

When this provision was brought forward in the act, it is in keeping with the spirit of the original act as it was outlined. These convictions involve such very serious offences as impaired driving and criminal negligence. ft should be noted as well, Madam Speak er, for the members' information that the legislation pertaining to subs equent offences will be applicable to all Criminal Code offences, rather than pertaining exclusiv ely, as it is at the current time, to only alco hol-related Criminal Code offences. We have also incorporated a new

section in the act, which will grant municipal councils the authority to pass by-laws concerning the issuance of parking permits. Councils will have the right to issue parking permits, which exempt residents of specific streets from parking restrictions on that particular street, but the general parking restrictions ma y apply .

This particular amendment responds to reque sts made by the City of Winnipeg and particularly by the City of Brandon, which is very interested in having a by-law that would allow residents to park on their adjacent streets, regardless of the general prohibition on parking that may exist accord ing to other sections of the act. Changes are additionally proposed for transporting livestock.

Under the amended act, producers will be permit ted to transport livestock for other farmers to and from a farm, pasture or agricultural exhibition or fair, provided the combined weight of their vehicle and livestock does not exceed 13 ,500 kilograms. This change reflects requests by producers who appeared before a livestock inquiry cond ucted by the Motor Tr ansport Board earlier this year.

I am sure memb ers are aware, a numb er of agricultur al organizations and individuals had expressed the desire to have this provision included, as is the case with other agricultural commodities, where a farmer can assist his neighbour in a neigh bourly way for the cost of actually carrying out and offering that service, but not for profit. But the compensation could not exceed the costs of carrying out that particular operation.

What we are including here for the Member for Arthur , who is not listening, we are including livestock that would be transported to the farm from the pasture and from fairs and exhibitions, which was -(Interjection)- as the Member for Arthur has stated, Madam Speak er, from his seat, has been taking place in this province illegally and actually inadv ertently insofar as it not being consistent with the law throughout the province for a num ber of years. So what we are intending to do as a result of this hearing is to legalize this practice, which we believe is reasonable and in the public int erest.

In addition to that, Madam Speaker, in an effort to elimi nate ambigu ity, the definition of compensation as it applies to motor carriers has been broadened to clarify the authority of the Motor Tr ansport Board with regard to carriers. I think that is an impo rtant change and clari fication with regard to the definit ion of compensation.

Another new clause in the act will grant the Motor Tr ansport Board the power to sanction operators of heavy trucks over a registered weight of 4,500 kilograms -that's really anything over a half-ton truck -should they breach provisions of The Highway Tr affic Act for offences such as misuse of plates. At the current time, the Tr ansport Board does not have that jurisdiction and, in essence, is not able to enforce violations in that area.

Should an operator be in violation of The Highway Traffic Act, the Motor Tr ansport Board would have the power to require a show-cause hearing and to dir ect the Registrar to cancel vehicle registrations or to refuse to register vehicles for the offending ind ividual. The board could also impose a fine that is consistent with other fine provisions in the act of up to $5,000 for these offences. Since the Tr ansport Board exists to provide general sup ervision of truck transportation in the province, it is the appropriate body, I believe, to deal with all violations involving trucking.

It is antici pated that this new provision will allow for mor e effective enforcement of economic and safety regulations pertai ning to trucking within our province. I might point out, Madam Speaker, that the trucking indu stry generally supports this move. Last year, the Commercial Vehicle Inspection Program was in troduc ed in to the act. This enable d the introduction of a compul sory inspection program for commercial vehicles which has started May 1, 19 87, of this year, just a little over a week-and-a-half ago.

Pr esent legislation stipu lates the Registrar must notify those commercial vehicle owners who will be ins pected by an individual letter to each of them each time they are going to be in spected. Extensive admin istrative work has already been carried out in preparation for this program, and it has now been determined that it would be much more advantageous for fleet owners and the government if the program was operated on a reg ula r-inter val inspection basis rather than on a mail calf-up notice from the Registrar . The amendments will ensure that this is the case.

What they will provide for is an inspection for all truck-tractors in the province every six months and tractor semi-trailers once a year. So that will be an inspection program that will take place and that will be put in place for all vehicles. The onus will be on those fleet owners to ensure that their trucks comp ly. That will mean, Madam Speaker, that we will have a program that will largely cost the province not hing, 1998

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 because what we have done is certified various mechanics and shops throughout the province in the private sector. They will conduct the inspections and will be charged by the garage owner or the mechanic for the services of the inspection. In the case of the individual owners who have their own shops, they can be self-certified. Therefore, a major trucking firm, for example, can do their own in spections under this system. We believe that will be a system that will work well and is long overdue.

I might point out to the members of the Opposition that this is pur suant to an agreement, the Commercial Vehicle In spection Program, that was actually signed in 1981 and is being impl emented now in this province after a lot of admin istrative work that took place before it could be put in place. It also will be consistent, Madam Speak er, with the major provisions that are going to be put in place over the next two years with regard to the National Safety Code that all provinces have agreed to.

I will be bringing in amendments, Madam Speak er, to facilitate that in the next Session of the Legislature, to facilitate the introduction of the National Safety Code. In concluding, let me emphas ize that many of these amendments have been in corporated to ensure the safety of the motoring public and to facilitate the delivery and admin istration of vital programs provided by the Manitoba Department of Hig hways and Tr ansportation. We believe that all of these amendments are being made with due consideration and in the public interest, Madam Spea ker. Thank you.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Madam Speak er. I would like to ask a question of the Min ister, based on page 3, where the random stopping of motorists is going to be coming under the bill. Can the Min ister ind icate whether he's got a legal opinion on it, and would he maybe be prepared to table that legal opinion on that portion of it so that we can be assured that it qualifies under the Charter of Rights or the human right s aspect of it? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Ma dam Spea ker, we have consulted extensively with the Attorney-General and his department, and are advised by the Attorney General that the legal advice that he has is that this will comply with the Charter. If there is a formal written copy of such an opinion, I would be prepared to provide that to the members of the Opposition, provide it to the critic, if that would be sufficient. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Madam Speaker , I move, seconded by the Member for Gl adstone, that de bate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried.

Bill NO. 24 - THE CORPORATIONS ACT HON. A. MACKLING presented Bill No. 24,

An Act to amend The Corporations Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les corporations, for Second Reading. MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Mi nister of Consumer and Corpora te Affairs. HON. A. MACKLING: Madam Speak er, the present Corporations Act was brought into force on November 1, 1976. This act is similar to the

Canada Business Corpo rations Act and was recom mended to this Legislature by a non-partisan special comm ittee compo sed of some of the most kn owledgeable corporation lawyers in Ma nitoba. Amo ng other thing s, The Corporations Act was designed to stre amline un necessary corporate procedures for the public, the business person and the solicitor; and to make more uniform the laws applying to corporations in Canada. These objections have been, to a large extent, realized. This is borne out by the fact that most other Canadian jurisdictions have now enacted similar legislation.

The bill I'm now presenting to this House helps to maintain un iformity with the Canada Busi ness Corporations Act, as a num ber of sections are being amended in order to keep step with the federal act. As well, provisions are being added to the act to allow corporations, which have received their incorporating documents in English or French, to be reissued the documents in the other of those langu ages. Further , the inv estigative powers which exist under the act are being given exclusively to the director appointed under the Corporations Act.

This is in keeping with the federal statute and is more appropriate, as the dir ector is the person who is charged with other admi nistrative duties under the act. I can assure the House that a more detailed explanation of the provisions will be available to members during consideration in commit tee. I have given the whip for the Opposition the spread sheets of the prop osed legislation and a copy of my remarks; and I certainly commend this legislation for all members of the House to give their consent. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A.

DRIEDGER: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Mem ber for Assi ni boia , that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 27 - THE REAL PROPERTY ACT AND VARIOUS OTHER ACTS AMENDMENT ACT HON. R. PENNER presented Bill No. 27, The Real Property Act and Various Other Acts Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les biens reels et diverses autres lois, for Second Read ing. MOTION presented. 1999

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: The Member for St. Norbe rt is familiar with the background of this bill and, accordin gly, I will not be long in my explanation. In fact, I made a few remarks on introducing the bill for First Reading. Some membe rs may be aware that our Land Titles system, in a sense, fulfills several roles, one of which is, in effect, a de bt-collecting agenc y. It is that because it is possible for anyone who secures a judgment or has a lien to register that in the Land Titles Office in something called the General Register .

The difficulty is that those registrations were by name and bore no reference to a specific piece of land. The difficulty that follows is that the re are so many names which are sim ilar, and Manitoba that it is I think especially true. I mean members, and the Member for Emerson will kno w, as well as I do, how many Dietrich Friesens there are in the Province of Mani toba. So we have Dietrich A. Friesen, Dietrich B. Friesen, Dietrich H. Friesen, and on and on it goes.

Now if somebody comes to register a judgment in the General Register , it is the procedure that any registrations thereafter of a transaction in volving land, whether a conveyance or a mortgage, is to be made subject to any judgment. But often a conveyance was held up and said, well, there's a judgment against Bill Smith, and it turned out that was some other Bill Smith. So then they'd have to file an affidavit -no, I'm not the Bill Smith, I've never been that Bill Smith; I don't have any debts, I don't have any hypothecations, I don't owe the bank any money; it's not me -and it was an expensiv e process.

We attempted to deal with that by amendments to The Real Property Act in'8 2-83, which put more of an onus on exact-name registrations, but the difficulty with that was that there were other provisions of The Real Property Act which cumulat ively had the effect of making lawyers, who were handling transactions, potentially at risk if it turned out, not through any fault of theirs, that a registration went through.

They reported to a mortgage company that ever ything was okay, that their mortgage was a first charge against the land, and then it turned out that in fact this chap who got the benefits of the mortgage proceeds was in fact a judgment debtor, only that didn't em erge from the General Regist er, and potent ially the re is outstanding against conveyancing lawyers a substancial risk. In order to deal with that, we are in fact -(lnterjection) lt's sometimes hard in this House, isn't it, Madam Speaker? -(Interjection)- I know they do.

The Minister of Ind ustry, Tr ade and Technology is not in terested in real property conveyancing anym ore, but one day he may be. He may be. But in any event, Madam Speak er, what we're doing, in effect, is adopting a recommendation of the Law Reform Commission made in 19 80. We're getting rid of the General Register in its present form, but we want to make sure that we're not prejudicing anybody's rights. So there's a delay of two years during which the General Register will persist, but it will be phased out.

After two years, you can still use the Land Titles Office to enforce a judgment, but you have to register it against the land. That's what happens. So if I get a judgment against the Member for St. Norbert -and one day, if he doesn't talk nicely about me, I may have to sue him for libel or something like that -and he has a piece of land registered in his name, I can file it as a judgment against his land. But I can't just file a judgment up in the air in -(Interjection)- Well, if you're like me, you'd probably transfer it to somebody else. But in any event, Madam Speaker, that is the gist of the bill.

I'll conclude by saying we've consulted with the Real Property

Section of the Ma nitoba Bar, with Mark Schulman and Alexander Morton of the Real Property Bar . We've consulted, indeed, with the Canadian Bankers' Association, which had some concerns, and now recognize, although they might prefer to keep the General Register in its present form, the justice of what is being done. And accordingly , Madam Speak er, I commend this bill to the House and am prepared to deal with it in more detail in committee. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speak er, I'd just like to ask one question to the Attorn ey-General for clarific ation.

In req uiring th at a Certificate of Judgment be registered against the land owned by a judgment debtor, is the Attorney-General and the government committed to providing a form of property owner's registry which a creditor could have access to and thereby be in a position to be able to file a Certificate of Judgment against specific property owned by the jud gment debtor? Without that sort of property owner registry, I think this bill, while certainly helping some people, does not particularly help creditors. HON. R. PENNER: I thank the mem ber for th at qu estion.

It's my un der standing that when the automation of the Land Titles system, which is presently under way, is completed, and that is not much more than two years away, in fact, it will be possible to supplement the usual sources of information as to whether or not someone has property by reference to the automated system in the Land Titles Office. MR. G. MERCIER: I move, seconded by the Member for Fort Garry, that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 28 -THE HIGH-LEVEL RADIO ACTIVE WASTE ACT HON. G. LECUYER presented Bill No. 28, The High Level Radioactive Waste Act;

Loi sur les dechets radioactifs de haute activite, for Second Reading. MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Minister of the Environment. HON. G. LECUYER: Madam Speaker, last spring, Cabinet adopted eight environme ntal management 2000

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 principles to provide pr esent and future framework for the protection and enhancement of the environment of our province for the benefit of all Manitobans. While this legislation, Madam Speak er, supports those principles gener ally, there are three which are worth perhaps repeating here, and they are the principles of leadersh ip, prevention and stew ardship.

By introducing this legislation where the government is provi di ng indeed leadersh ip not only to those Manitobans who are concerned about leadership, because Manitoba is the first jurisdiction in Canada to introduce this type of legislation and perhaps the only one where it needs to be introduced. The legislation will prevent a problem that could emerge in the future and, in that sense, is a clear statem ent of our intent to protect and maintain our ecological processes, including our watersheds, free from huma n-generated nucl ear contamina nts and therefore supporting our stewardship role.

I want to be clear at the outset, Madam Speak er. What this bill intends to do is basically allow to happen what is happening now in Pina wa, and that is resear ch. Inasmuch as the Canadian society allows the use of nuclear energy to be used to produce our electricity or for other uses, it has a responsibility to make sure that research is un dertaken to deal with the by products; that is the waste that this source of energy produces.

Much of that researc h, Madam Speak er, currently takes place in Canada, especially the underground nuclear research which is now taking place near Lac du Bonnet, and this will allo w that to continue to happen. Oher types of research occur in Pina wa, which eventually is aimed in the medical field or perhaps other fields of genetics and plant growth, etc., and that will not prevent that from happening. Madam Speaker , we're talking about legislation here which will prevent the storage -underground disposal -pardon me -of nuclear waste. We've taken that stand.

We made that stand public at a number of occasions in the past, more specifically , roughly a year or so ago when sites, potential sites, were being consi dered in the United States, at which time both myself and the Premier made our stance known; and, more recently , in front of the Standing Commi ttee of the House of Commons, I again reiterated the stance of Manitoba.

Now that the research has been taking place for a fairly lengthy period of time, now that other nations are also involved in that research, we sought assurances and guaran tees that Manitoba would not be chosen as the site for final disposal of such waste.

We were pr ovided with some assuranc es but only lim ited gua rant ees; and, as I say, because of the fact that that research has been taking place for some time and we're getting closer and closer to the day when validation and hearings, perhaps, on that research will be taking place, the fear is ever present, and because of the inv olvement of Japan, United States, etc., as part of that research, Manitobans continue to fear that there will come a day when it will be said, well, why not go a step further - we feel that it's safe enough -use the site for the disposal of nuclear waste, and that is what we want to prevent, Madam Speaker.

I will say, at the outset, we do not benefit from the production of the energy through the use of nuclear fuels and, there fore, Madam Speaker , we do not feel 200 1 we should be assuming the burden of having to deal with the waste produced. Madam Speaker, this legislation doesn't stand alone. It is one more step in a comprehensive approach to protecting the citizens of the pr ovince from the risks associated with the disposal of high-level nuclear waste. Members of this House, Madam Speaker, will recall the incisive in tervention in the U.S. site-selection process when potential sites were proposed in the U.S.

section of the Red River Valley which drains in Manitoba. The Premier himself took a lead role in that particular intervention. We believe that because nuclear waste is being generated by other jurisdictions, ultimately safe disposal methods will be necessary. However, as I said, because Manitoba neither generates nor benefits from nuclear power, we feel we should not be put at risk by it. Three provinces essentially use it: Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick.

There are seven other provinc es who do not -included among those is Manitoba -but of those seven, only Manitoba carries the responsibility of that research and, therefore, of all the provinces in Canada, perhaps there is only one that needs to make that statement, that clear statement, that it does not want to see disposal within it's own bound aries nor within the dr ainage basins tha t dr ain within our boundaries. We have repeatedly sought assurances, as I said, but we're only been given limited guarantees. The new act is designed to address the concerns of Manitobans.

It should exclude Manitoba from future site-selection processes for high-level nuclear waste disposal facilities. MR. A. DRIEDGER: How can you guarantee that? HON. G. LECUYER: The Mem ber for Emerson asks from his seat, Madam Speaker, "How can you guarantee that?" The legislation, Madam Speak er, is only valid for as long as it's on the books and legislation is only as good as the will of the people of the province and the lawmakers who are sitting in this Legislature at that time. The member kn ows that; so he's got his answer. He knows the answer.

The Manitoba Government has been consistent in its policy of support for nuclear waste research at Atomic Energy of Canada because there we have one of the wor ld's class research laboratories; but we are opposed, and continue to be opposed, to the disposal of high-level nuclear waste within our borders and near our borders in drai nage basins that drain into our province.

Madam Speaker, I believe it is an appropria te time for us to embody our stance in legislation -our policy of supporting research into disposal methods but not accepting the actual disposal facility itself -and this new act will make it a violation of provincial law to do so; that is to dispose nuclear waste in Ma nitoba. The act does, while prohibiting the disposal of nuclear waste, Mada m Speak er, continu e to ensure that research will continue by providing for safe storage of high-level wastes being used in research activities or produced by medical research or treatment centres in Manitoba.

Second ly, it requires that this waste be stored above ground to permit retrieval and provide for continuous monitoring.

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Thirdly, it prohibits the storage of waste not intended for research purposes in Manitoba. I'd like just to touch briefly on the background of Atomic Energy of Canada's research activities in Manitoba. The Crown corporation has had a research establishment in Pinawa since the early Sixties and scientists have long been attracted to the idea that since particular rock formati ons have remained stable for millions of years, they would provide an excellent medium in which to dispose of high-level nuclear waste .

If, in addition, such rock body was homogeneous and minimally fractured, it would be an even better candidate and, of course, the Canadian Shield is peppered with just such deposits called plutons . Pinawa , in fact, is located in the middle of a huge pluton known as the Lac du Bonnet Batholith . Atomic Energy of Canada decided in the mid-Seventies that, because of these features, this geologic disposal method was not only promising, but so attractive that it would be the only alternative to be seriously researched in Canada .

That I find, Madam Speaker, a little distressing, because I think that we've , perhaps as a country, put our eggs all in the same basket in terms of long -term developments in terms of energy. I would hope that in the future, more research funding by the Canadian government is going to go into alternative sources of energy such as biomass, wind energy , solar energy as potential sources that do not present the risks, the longstanding risks that nuclear wastes present. In that sense, perhaps Canada can be faulted .

But inasmuch as we are using nuclear energy and are producing wastes which will last for centuries or milleniums, we have a responsibility to address what we'll do to deal with the wastes produced. In 1981, Atomic Energy of Canada, as we all know now, signed a 20-year lease with the Government of Manitoba on approximately one-and-one-half sections of Crown land about 15 miles northeast of Pinawa, to construct an underground research laboratory known today by most people as the URL.

The AECL chose this location mainly because it is part of the Lac du Bonnet Batholith , which is completely exposed , with very little surface cover - easy to get at, in other words . Then they have sunk a shaft, 250 metres, with rooms excavated where they can conduct that research . Recent interest from the United States likely will mean that this shaft will be deepened to twice its current depth for study and research at much deeper levels . As well, as I mentioned before , interest has been shown and probably funding will be forthcoming from Japan.

So ultimately we know in Canada there will be a need probably for long-term disposal of high-level nuclear waste , and it's prudent for us to be examining possibl e options now in advance of the urgent necessity . In fact, a second lease was entered into which permits regional ground water study associated with the URL research. That was entered into in 1986. As I said , though , the catch is one that has troubled Manitobans from the very first time AECL began discussing the deep geologic disposal concept in association with its Pinawa operation.

The catch is this : once the researh is over, there will be indeed temptation to use this repository as a permanent disposal site. Why go elsewhere and start the site specific investigations again will be undoubtedly the question . Our scientists respond, that in this area, to conduct a full research program, the rock will be disturbed, perhaps more than it would be in site specific investigations in the future once the basic knowledge has been established. In essence, the more holes you drill, the less suitable the site becomes for a natural waste repository.

So too many potential pathways to the environment have been opened up. That is the way I feel this site , once the research has been completed , would be left, the situation in which it would be left, sort of a Swiss cheese-like rock formation. It wou ld not be suitable as a disposal site . Nonetheless, the question has troubled the Government of Manitoba and many of its citizens , but not necessarily the scientists involved in the nuclear waste research program. Their argument is that if the disposal method is proven to be safe, why worry about its use in Manitoba.

That brings us to an interesting point, Madam Speaker . The moment scientists use words such "safe" and "acceptable ," they are talking the language of values, but values in a democratic society are not determ ined by scientists. Sci en ce can help us understand relative risks but it is our society which determines in each particular instance what is an acceptable level of risk and who bears that risk . That , Madam Speaker, is a socio-political decision which we, as lawmakers , have to make in consultation with the citizens we represent.

The disposal of nuclear waste in crystalline rock will bring some risk with it; there 's no doubt about that. Even the most ardent supporters of the concept agree that each component of the disposal system will bring with it some degree of risk, if not the actual disposal, which we can't guarantee, then there will be risk for sure in transportation , in handling , in packaging, in storage , and other components which may be added later. So, risk there will be.

Since water is the transport mechanism for potential contamination , that risk will be borne by the watershed in which the disposal system is located, and we all know that this particular site is in the heart of a fairly heavily populated area . It is an area which is highly prized for recreational purposes as well. So, Madam Speaker, it is certainly not an appropriate site for these further reasons; but the primary one , of course, is always and remains the one, is that who benefits from the production of the energy needs to assume the responsibility of disposing.

Again , therefore, I say Manitoba does not benefit from the generation of the energy produced from the use and, therefore , should not be asked to bear the risks associated with the disposal. Taking this stand on nuclear waste disposal does not mean , however, that we, as a government, are holding out the false prospect for Manitobans of a risk-free involvement. As a society , we attempt to do just as we do as individuals - not expose ourselves unnecessar ily to large or unnecessa ry risks which outweigh the benefits to be gained .

Manitoba does accept the risks associated with non nuclear hazardous wastes it generates. For the benefit of the Member For Emerson who keeps moaning and groaning from his place and raising that very point, I repeat: Manitoba does accept the risks associated with non-nuclear hazardous wastes it generates, and 2002

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 our Hazardous Wastes Ma nagement Program was developed to address that very problem. In this case, we benefit from the use of the products which result in hazardous wastes and, therefore, we have to accept the risks associated with the treatment and disposal, and we are. That is why we passed The Hazardous Wastes Ma nagement Act, Madam Speak er, and that is why we are proceed ing to implement its full operation.

In closing, Madam Speak er, I would just like to note that in February 19 87, I reiterated Manitoba's position on nuclear waste disp osal to the House of Commons Standing Commi ttee on Environment and Forestry in Ottawa. At that time, I announced the government's intention to proceed with actions which would ensure that a nuclear waste disposal facility would never be established in Manitoba.

The Ma nitoba High-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Act represents our government's intention to deal with this issue and permit those involved in Canada's High-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Program to exclude Manitoba once and for all from any future site-selection processes . Thank you, Madam Speak er. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member For Assiniboia, that the deba te be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NQ 29 - THE CONDOMINIUM ACT HON. M. HEMPHILL presented Bill No. 29,

An Act to amend The Condominium Act; Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les condominiums, for Second Reading. MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Mini ster of Housing. HON. M. HEMPH ILL: Thank you, Madam Speaker . Madam Speak er, when the condominium legislation was first introd uced in Manitoba, it was in 19 68, and it was two years before there was any condom inium built in the province. Since that time, we have had very dramatic gr owth in our condominium development, and we're expecting even gre ater. In 19 70, there was only one condominium building with 100 units, and in 19 87, we have over 200 with 15 ,000 units.

It is clear that there is a great deal of in terest. Mo st of the apartments that are being regist ered now, Madam Speaker, are being registered as condominiums just in case the owners want to convert them, down the road, to condominiums. It's an ind ication tha t in both the building of new condominium unit s and conversion of existing apartm ents that there is a great pot entia l for condominium growth to match all of the housing growth that we're experiencing in the province of Manitoba. The act has a couple of purp oses, Madam Spea ker.

We want to make sure that condominium buyers are adequately protected and we want to make it easier for condominium managers to manage their projects. So our amendments are arising out of concerns tha t were raised by condominium owners, developers and vendors. We consulted with a number of people: the Mani toba

Chapter of the Canadian Condominium Institute, Consumer Affairs and ... -(Inaudi ble)-to come up with these changes, Madam Speaker. One of the changes that we're making req uir es that condom inium owners ha ve input early on in the management of the property through an elected board of directors. Cur rently, Madam Speaker, the developer decides when to turn over the control of the project to the owners.

What we are saying is that as soon as 50 percent of the units have been sold, that a new board of dir ectors must be elected so that the unit owners and the people can begin to get or have control of the development project that they are sharing. We're also instituting a reserve fund, Madam Speaker, and this is to allow the orderly maint enance of the project where they're not faced, after a period of 10 or 15 years, with tremendous costs. They are allowed to put money into a reserve fund for large repairs.

They have three years to reach 5 percent of the value of the project and they can go beyond that if they decide that the amount of the reserve fund should be larger and if the majority of the unit . . .-(lna udible)- One of the major areas that we're changing, Madam Speak er, is the requirement for buyers to be given all relevant information. When you'r e buying a condominium, it's not as simple as buying a private house, and we're making sure that they 'r e given additional information about the project's budget and the management before they agree to buy the unit.

We have also required that they have to be given detailed information about the reserve fund and the management agreement 48 hours before the execution of the purchase agreement, and we are also building in a 48 hour cooling-off period after the signing so that if the pur chaser gets home and reads all the fine print and finds out that there were things in there they are responsible for, that they are not aware of, they are able to remove themselves from the agreement up to a 48-hour period, Madam Speaker.

We're also trying to keep people out of court, Madam Speaker , by setting up an arbitration process when there are disputes between the developer and the unit holder . The Department of the Landlord and Tenant Affairs branch can media te disputes with them through an arbitration process that they will agree to that, hopefully, will eliminate, as much as possible, disp utes and difficulties on minor matters without requiring them to go to court to resolve these minor matters, Ma dam Speak er.

We are saying that they can amend the condominium declaration when they have a vote of 80 percent of the unit holders instead of the current requirement of 100 percent of the unit holders. It allo ws them to make decisions when the majority of the owners agree, because there have been previous problems, Madam Spea ker, when just one owner was absent and they weren't able to make changes. We are also allowing a proxy vote so that they can, if the unit holders do not show up, receive their proxy vote on the issue. We're allowing the condominium corporation to enforce the Ass essment for Common Element s 2003

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Expenses. Now they have to go to court to collect any defaulted payments. The change will giv e the corporation gr eater author ity in col lecting these payments, Madam Speaker . Ju st in summar y, I think that the change s are recognizing that there are going to be an increasingly large num ber of condominiums in the future, that we want to protect the right s of the people buying condominiums and the ability of the managers to manage the projects. We are also dealing with questions of consumer protection in this legislation, Madam Speaker .

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Madam Speaker , a couple of questions for clarification to the Min ister. Does the proposed act clarify as to who owns or who has the right to the money that is in either the reserve or contingency funds? It's always been a debate as to whether it belongs to the corporation, because they often take it as part of common element fees, or is it a revenue or an int erest by the unit owner that's really being held, you know, in sort of trust for them? Does the act clarify as to who actually owns it? HON. M.

HEMPHILL: Madam Speaker , the reserve mone y is in the fund and is, the allo cat ion and distribution of it will be determined by the majority of the unit holders. However, if the individual decides to sell their unit, that is one of the elements that is part of the negotiations. It's part of the settlement for them to determine what money is in the fund and it's agreed to between the buyer and the seller . MR. C.

BIRT: Then I'm taking from the Min ister's response, then, that the share of whatever special reserve fund it may be called, or contingency fund flows to the unit, so if it is sold it is taken then as adjus ted like you would adjust anything else in a sale. The Min ister is nodding her head, yes? HON. M. HEMPHILL: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: One other question for clarification. It's always the respon sibility of the corporation or the unit owner to do certain things, i.e. repair a leaking faucet or who should put the insulation in the attic.

The old act set out certain rights and the agreement that you entered into when you bought also specified it. But there was never any final adjudicating authority to say this is really corporati on's responsibility or tenant's resp onsi bility. I know I've adv ised both corporations and indi viduals as to what I think their particular rights are under a circumstance. Is there a mechanism where they could go, say, to the Rentalsman or someone like this, you know, an independent tribunal without going to court, because the courts, quite frankly , don't want to be bothered with a simple little question.

Yet it may have a $300 or $400 implication to the unit holder or to the corporation. So, is there some sort of mechanism in place that would allow sort of a third party independent adjudic ation of, whose obliga tion or rights are they? I think it flows much from the issue that the Min ister was referring to as to as to certain rights and certain obligations such as to pay common element fees. There are some changes there. But I'm wondering if it will go further to define who will have to do what. HON. M. HEMPHILL: Madam Speaker, that is also included.

I think what we have recog nized, that almost every disp ute and every problem that was created in the past, whether it was the unit holder wanting to have what they thought were their rights or the owner collecting things from the unit holder that they thought they were respon sible for, that where there were disputes they almost always had to go to court. There was no other recourse for either party.

What we have done in this act is designed in a number of areas, that wher ever there are disp utes of that nature, that they can have a mediation, they can choose to have a mediation/ arbitration process that will, possibly, if they agree to it, settle the matter between them with a third party adjudicating, and remove the requirement to go to court. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Assiniboia. MR. R. NORDMAN: I move, seconded by the Member for Fort Garry, that the debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 15 -THE CROP INSURANCE ACT HON. B. URUSKI presented Bill No. 15,

an Act to amend The Cr op Insur ance Act,

Loi sur L'a ssurance-recolte, for Second Reading. (Recommended by His Honour the Lieutena nt-Governor.) MOTION presented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speak er, I'm pleased to be able to make a few ge neral comme nts with respect to the Cr op Insurance Program and some specific comments on the amendments to the Crop Insurance Act that are now before us. By way of backgro und, I should remind members that the program began in Manitoba in 19 60, making this our 28th year the program has been in existence.

Man itoba pioneered the program in this country, Madam Sp eaker , with test areas established in the Southwest area of the pr ovince, comprising of the Rur al Muni cipalities of Edward, Arthur , Brenda, Albert, and Pipestone, the area that was considered the most risky as far crop production was concerned. Other areas inv olved in the test during the first year were in the south-central area, the area considered to be low risk, comprising of the R.M.' s of Grey, Dufferin, Thompson, Roland, Stanley and Rhineland.

The medium-risk areas inv olved two areas: in the north, it comprised the R.M.'s of Dauphin, Gilbert Plains, 2004

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Grandview, Boulton, and Silver Creek; and West Red River, involving the R.M.'s of MacDonald, Morris, and Montcalm. Just over two years ago, Madam Speaker, on the occasion of the 25th anni versary of the program, I attended a reception at Melita, the constituency of the Honourable Member for Arthur , the former Min ister of Agriculture, where we honoured those farmers who had been continuously insured with the Crop Insurance Program since 19 60. We singled out Mr. Grant Andrews of Coulter for special recognition because he had the lowest active contract num ber of all insured farmers.

His contract was No. 4. This made Mr . Andr ews the lo ngest continuously insured farmer in the program in Canada, Madam Speaker. I am pleased to advise you that Mr. And rews continues to be insured today. This will be his 28th year with the Crop Insurance Program. Unfortu nately, Mr . Andrew's health has required him to retire from farming this year, but he continues to be insured as a landlord. The corporation has made arrangements for him to retain his current contract num ber. I'm sure that all members of this Assembly will join with me in wishing Mr . and Mrs. Andrews well in their retirement.

Madam Speaker , many farmers have benefited from the program over its 28-year history. Mr . And rews told me that it didn't take long for the program to prove itself to him. In 19 61, just the second year of the program, all of the Prairies suffered from a devastating drought. I'm sure that every farm member in this House will remember 19 61; but Mr. And rews was able to get his in vestment back because he was insured. Most farmers weren't insured in 19 61 and they had to absorb their losses on their own. Mr. And rews was a young man back then.

Although he had a poor crop, he did receive his investment back, through his crop insurance indemnity and was able to continue farming. We'll never know how many other young farmers in 19 61 had to quit farming, because they wer en't insured and wer en't able to get their investment back. The same situation, Madam Speak er, holds true today, perhaps even more today than it did in 19 61. Today, farmers have to purchase most of their inputs, fertilizer, herbicides, diesel fuel; all require a cash outla y. In 19 61, the major input was the farmer's own labo ur.

If he had a poor crop, he might get by, by tightening his belt and relying on his garden, and his pigs, and chickens and his cows; but that's not how it works tod ay. The labour input is now a relatively sma ll proportion of the total input cost. If the crop is lost, it's still necessary to pay all those bills. Even if a farmer has a garden and livestock to feed hims elf, he won't be able to keep farming unless he can pay his bills. Tha t is why I think crop insurance is even more important now than in 19 60, when it first started.

Ma dam Speake r, it occurs to me that "crop ins uran ce" possibly isn't the best name for the program; "c ash in ves tment insu rance" might be a better description of what the program is really all about. That is what the farmer is insuring -it's his cash investment; tha t's what he wants to protect. Ma dam Speak er, I'd like to spend a few minutes talking about financing of the Crop Insurance Program, because it's the very key to this piece of legislation. As you know, crop insurance is financed by the farmers, Federal Government and the province.

The farmers and the Federal Gover nment each pay half of the total premium, while the province pick s up all the adminis trative costs. This arrangement works well and ha s resulted in a sig nificant in crease in farmer participation, since this arrangement was negotiated in the early 1970's. Madam Speaker, there have been indi cations that the Federal Govern ment wishes to change the sharing arrangement. It has been suggested that the province should pick up a larger share of the total cost.

Although no official proposal in this regard has been made, this has been suggested as, what I would call, "a trial balloon." Madam Speaker, I think all members of this House should be united in trying to shoot this balloon out of the sky.

If the Federal Government is allo wed to offload the cost onto the provinces, of all the various programs that have been suggested ; and in many cases, imp lemented -whether they be crop insurance, health or edu cation programs, any other major programs of the Province of Manitoba -it means we will have an exaggeration of the difference that already exists in the standard of living between the provinces.

Richer provinces, such as Ontario, will continue to be able to provide a high standard of services, while poorer provinces, like Manitoba, will not be able to provide that service, or if we do, it will certainly have to be at a lower standard. Madam Speaker, we must not allow this country - our country of Canada - to develop in this way. All mem bers of the Legislatur e must be un ited in demanding that we retain a strong federal contribution to these national programs. The Crop Insurance Program has matured in this province, Madam Speaker.

Although there is still room for expansion, the majority of our crop land is now insured. In 19 85, a numb er of program cha nges were introduced. Since then, insured acres have incr eased by 700,000. In 198 6, the dollar coverage in place had increased by $11 3 million, an incr ease of more than 35 percent.

Nine new crops have been insured in the last three years, and those, just for the Honourable Members' information, when we discussed them in Estimates: winter wheat, pedigr eed Tim othy seed, honey, onions, parsnips, soya beans, pedigr eed alfalfa seed, carrots and rutabagas -I'm sure the Honourable Member from Portage appreciates some of those crops that we have put under the program. In addition, Madam Speak er, the Livestock Feed Security Program has been developed and expanded to cover all Manitoba municip alities. This expansion all took place during a time of budget constraint, Madam Speak er.

The corporation has received an annual in crease in appropriation averaging just 2 percent over the last four years. This is a tremendous achievement at a time when we all must find ways to do more with less. The corporation has also made significant strides in reducing the time required to pay claims and to reduce the paperwork needed to run the program. All of this progress gives me much pleasure and I'm sure is appreciated by many Manitoba farmers. For example, the average number of days to pay post-harvest claims has decreased by about 22 days during the last three 2005

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 years. Previously , an application for a contract could have requir ed up to seven documents to be completed. Now, only one is needed. Also, the proof of loss form has been elimi nated. This was a form a farmer had to sign and return to the corporation before he or she could receive their cheque. The corporation now sends a cheque with a statement dir ectly to the farmer , with an ind ication that endorsing the cheque constitutes an agreement and the matter will be settled.

This puts the farmer to much less trouble and gets the cheque to him about 10 days faster than it would otherwise have been pos sible. As far as the future is concerned, the corporation has been busy rewriting virtually all of its computer programs. It now has an on-line capability and will be testing the feasibility of utilizing computers in its field offices beginning in January of 1988. If this develops as expect ed, it will mean further impr ovement in service to Manitoba farmers. Another priority for the corporation is to develop and im plement a system of indi vid ualized coverage adjustment.

I think we are all aware, Madam Speak er, that ther e are considerable di fferences in the productivity of different farmers. It is necessary that the program recognize this fact when coverage levels are established. The current program, of course, already recognizes differences between farmers. The maximum inc rease above basic coverage for wheat is three bushels per acre; and the maximum reduction below basic coverage is six bushels per acre. In addition, premium discounts and surcharges can result in farmers paying 25 percent more, or 25 percent less than the basic premium for the area.

So, Madam Speaker, the present program does make considerable effort to sort farmers out by increasing or decreasing their coverage and by increasing or decreasing their premiums. The problem with the present program is that it does not distinguish between poor management and poor weather. If a farmer has a poor crop and all other farmers have a poor crop because of a drought, they will lose coverage and have his or her premium increased. This could be considered unfair if the loss is clearly due to weather.

On the other hand, if weather conditions are very favourable, a farmer could obtain an in crease in coverage and a decrease in premium, even though his management is only average. The present program makes adjustments in coverage and premiums based on experience, which is a function of both the management of the farmer and weather conditions in the area. What is needed, though, Madam Speak er, is a system that focuses mor e on management. It would be desirable to index a farmer's production to that of others in his risk area on similar soils.

His coverage should be in creased or decreased above basic levels, in a way that relates to how his production compares to others who are farming in the same environment and on similar soil. Such a system could truly be called a management sensitive coverage adjustment program. If we are able to do this, we could probably de-emphasize premium discounts and surcharges and place relatively more emphasis on adjusting coverage. After all, if a farmer is a good mana ger, this will manif est itself into higher yield averages and his coverage should reflect this fact.

If he has in creased coverage, he would have less need for a premium discount. This change is currently under consideration by the corporation. It has not been imple mented as yet, because it is a major development and must be done correctly when it is implemented. It could also be very costly. It would be necessary to have yield levels from all farmers each year, so that the farmer's yields could be in dexed against all other farmers. This would result in a tremendous incr ease in workl oad for the corporation and would have a significant impact on the corporat ion's budg et.

As such, it will be imple mented only if a cost-effective procedure can be worked out. Madam Spe aker , the amend ments to The Crop In surance Act are designed to further enhance the efficient running of the corporati on. Perhaps indi cative of the emphasis placed on reducing the amount of paper generated by the corporation, the new act will only be about half the length of the old act. In large part, most chang es simply clarify and shorten the act to make it more readable.

The major change is to alter the present requirement, to have premium rates and coverages for each crop, on each soil type, in each risk area approved by regulation each year. Madam Speak er, I'm sure you will understand, and I'm sure some members opposite who have served in Cabinet, will under stand that it is almost overwh elming -the volume of material that has to be approved by reg ula tions each year , simply because of the requirement contained in the current act.

Because of the volume of material that Cabinet must approve each year, I sincerely doubt that all the chan ges contained in the regulations get the fullest attention that they deserve. Effective control can be lost if Cabinet is required to consider and approve large volumes of detailed information. Madam Speak er, what the new act will do is require a regulation to be appr oved for each crop insurance plan. There would be one plan for the all-risk program, which would spell out how premium rates and coverages are to be established for each in sured crop.

For example, the plan might say that basic coverage for a risk area is to be established on the basis of average reported yields over the last 25 years, indexed in accordance with the technology adjustment factor, for each of the 10 soil classifications in each risk area, in that risk area. Another plan would exist for the Livestock Feed Security Program and would spell out how premium rates , coverages, and indemn ities have to be calculated tor it. Another plan would exist for the Honey Program; another for the additional

Part II Hail Program; and another for the Forage Program. These plans, Madam Speaker , would spell out the formula for es tablishing pr emium rates, bushel coverages , and how inde mnities are calculated. It would be, I guess one could describe it, something like a recipe that the corporation would have to follow. The board of dir ectors of the corporation would be respon sible for making sure the formula or the recipe was being followed. They would approve specific premium rates and coverages for each soil type in each risk area as long as the calculation was done in accordance with the regulation.

If the policy or the formula for establishing premium rates and coverages was not changed in a particular 2006

Wednesd ay, 13 May, 1987 year, there would be no need to have a new regulation. The corporation would simply add, in the crop insurance experience from the most recent year, in accordance with the formula spelled out in the regulation, to come up with a new premium rate and bushel coverages for each quarter

section in the province. The advantage, Madam Speaker, of this approach is that Cabinet would only have to approve changes in policy of the corporation, changes in the formula or recipe, if you like. Cabin et would be relieved of the task of approving the calculations that result from implementing the formula, something that I believe that Cabin et has not, and is ill equipp ed to do so. Madam Speak er, I think this approach enhan ces Cabinet control because it requi res Cabinet to consider relevant matters, the policies of the corporation.

It relieves Cabinet from the respo nsibility of approving the arithmetic done by the corporation's staff. This new arrangement will benefit the corporation by reducing the amount of material that has to be prepared for Cabinet consideration. The corporation will of course have to calculate premium rates and coverages. This new arrangement will benefit farmers because it means the corporation can get the program approved and made available to them earlier than would otherwise be possible.

Madam Speaker , another significant change is to remove the $2 million ceil ing on working capital advances that exist in the present act. I want to say that no control would be lost, because Cabinet would still be required to approve in advance before the money is made available to the corporation. The advantage of this change is that it would provide an avenue for the corporation to make indemnity payments to farmers in the event the reserve and reinsurance funds are dep leted and interest-free loans are re quir ed from the pr ovince and the Federal Government.

I want to state, Ma dam Speake r, that our neighbouring province, the Province of Saskatchewan, got caught in this predicament in 1985 when it suffered from its second significant crop loss in a row. Its reserve and reinsurance funds were dep leted and it couldn't get its money from Ottawa in a timely fashion. This had the result of delaying payment to farmers. Without the change being proposed, Madam Speaker, Manitoba could not advance the corporation any more than $2 million while it waited for federal funds to be transfered .

This would not be sufficient if the province suffered a similar crop loss situation like the one we had in 1980. Madam Speaker , you might say this is a pre-emptive action. It is moving now to avoid what might be a problem down the ro ad. And, of course, Madam Speaker, we don't want to put Manitoba farmers in a situation whereby they ha ve to wait for payments from the corporation simply because the Federal Government money, which was required by way of the Crop Insurance Agreement, has not yet arrived.

Madam Speaker, the Member for Virden earlier today raised questions about contingency plans, and in my remarks today, I covered really two significant areas: the one I have just now covered with the $2 million advance, which is a pre-emptive move in the event that we do suffer from a drought or huge claims, which will allow us to pay claims in a timely fashion with no 2007 limita tion on the reserves that may not be available should claims exceed those reserves.

Second ly, Madam Speaker, unlike 19 80 or 19 84, the years where there were federal-provincial ad hoe programs for dr ought assistance for feed supplies, we have, and the members now know, in 198 6 brought into place a province-wide Feed Security Program which, in fact, now does away with the need for ad hoc programming for feed supplies. Those two measu res are the pre-emptive measures and the contingency plans that we've talked about in terms of covering the needs of farmers both on the livestock side and on the grain side.

There may be other measu res that we may have to look at from time to time, but those two largest ones that we have had to contend with as governments, both present and previous, have in fact been covered off by amendments in this act and changes in program as a re sult of federal provincial agreements. Madam Speaker, another change is to make it clear that the corporation does have the authorit y to admin ister other programs related to agricultur e. It is now admini stering a compensation program for damage done by mig ratory waterfowl, on behalf of the Federal and Provincial Governments.

It also does crop loss adjusting as a service to Manitoba Natural Resources in the big game losses, Madam Speaker. These are logical extensions of the services offered by the corporation and it is appropria te that the present ones be clearly authorized. There may be, Madam Speaker. other programs which come up in the future for which Crop Insur ance is the logical implementation agency. It is necessary to have a means whereby these can be admin istered if it makes sense to do so. The Crop Insurance Program, Madam Speaker, is an important component of support network to Ma nitoba farmers.

It is necessary to ensure that program develops and adjusts to the changing nature of agriculture today. The proposed changes in this act will ensure that it continues to meet the needs of Manitoba farmers. Madam Sp eaker, I want to thank honourable members for giving me this opportunity to bring this bill before the House.

I would also like to, for all honourable mem bers, provide a numb er of copies for the Clerk's Office and for Mem bers of the Opposition - I have provided two copies for our own caucus -of what is normally called the spread sheet, which outlines the existing provisions in the act, the proposed changes, because most of those changes are technical, and the explanation sides. So I would ask the Pages to provide the necessary copies for the Clerk and the remaining copies for Members of the Oppositio n. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Virden. MR. G.

FINDLAY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move, seconded by the Member for Emerson, that deba te be adjourned on this bill. MOTION presented and carried. MADAM SPEAKER: Second Reading on the proposed motion of the Honourable Mini ster of Government

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Services, standing in the name of the Honourable Mem ber for La Verendrye -stand? (Agreed) The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Yes, Madam Sp eak er, I move, seconded by the Minister of Agriculture, that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Commit tee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION presented and carried and the Ho us e resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to Her Ma jesty with the Honourable Mem ber for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Community Services; and the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet in the Chair for the Department of Education. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY -EDUCA TION MR. CHAIRMAN, C. Baker: The commit tee will come to order. We're considering the Estimates of the Department of Education, page 54, Resolution 51 -the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I bel ieve the Mini ster was going to get some information from yesterd ay's discussions wherein he made reference to, I believe, that the amount of property education, or the taxes from education, had dropped to about 42 percent. He was using some figures? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minis ter of Education. HON. J. STORIE: I believe I gave you that. MR. C. BIRT: Was that on that large sheet? HON. J. STORIE: Yes. MR. C. BIRT: Mr .

Chairman, yesterday when we were discussing the whole question of technical training, especially the movement of the community colleges into the sort of community settings, the Min ister made reference to a num ber of facilities throughout the province and there was quite a number of them in the various schools. In the regional schools as to the, you know, in other words we were very rich as far as facilities were concerned throughout the province.

Keeping in mind the deba te we were entering into about trying to cooperate and, in fact, use some of the facilities that might be under utilized, has there been a position in the department then to cap or at least put on hold any new facilities that school divisions might be requiring in the way of technical training or job training so that we can ensure we're using what we've got in a better way than in fact, perhaps, adding more to the system? HON. J. STORIE: Mr.

Chairperson, some months ago, shortly before actually the announcement of the High School Review, I met with the chairperson of the Public Schools Finance Board and ind icated, and we went through a list of projects that had been sumbitted by school divisions and projects that had been previously approved, and tried to isolate those ones which were necessary and for which approval had been given and work undertaken.

The rest of them, there was a decision made to only deal with the emergency items, necessary upgrades and so forth, and that the rest should be put on hold, in effect, until such time as the High School Review made its report and made its recommendations, specifically with the expectation that the area of vocational education, indu strial education, would be dealt with in that review. MR. C. BIRT: In reading the annual report and some other documenta tion, the system seems to treat industrial arts separate from, what I would call regular technical training.

Is it not merely just another aspect of the technical training; I mean, shouldn't it be considered as one? Why the distinction or is that being changed? HON. J. STORIE: Well, Mr. Chairperson, the industrial arts area is tha t part of the curricu lum tha t's im plemented in the junior high level -essentially from the 7 to 9 level -and the nature of the experience of individual students is that is very short-lived; in other words, they rotate.

I believe in most indus trial arts areas, they would probably have four different sections in a given year; and they would include home ec, metals and drafting, something like that. The student would spend a fairly short period of time in each different area, and really , it's more a life-experience kind of opportunity than trade preparation or vocational education preparation. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: The Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: So I take it then that this aspect isn't in the 10-12 grade category. It's only a junior high phenomenon. Okay, thank you.

Yest erday we were talking to a deg ree on the involvement of the Department of Education in the whole question of Manp ower training. They require a fair num ber of spots at the community college. Does the Department of Labour have its own sort of educational advisory bodies, components? In other words, do they set their own educational programs or standards, or do they rely on the Department of Education? HON. J.

STORIE: The Depart ment of Labour is responsible in the main for the Apprenticeship Programs and they, along with representatives from Ind ustry, Labour and Education, set the parameters for those particular programs, but that really is their only involvement in the apprenticeship area. MR. C. BIRT: Mr . Chairman, is there any dupl ication of effort and services because they, I believe, require the college to deliver a certain type of service or educational standard to meet their Apprenticeship Program? So I'm just curious. 2008

Wednesday, 13 May, 1987 Do they have then their own sort of educational arm within their department that would be paralleling something that the community colleges would be offering, or the Department of Education would be offering? · HON. J. STORIE: Not really, bec ause the criteria for the curriculum are established, as I said, in a joint way with particip ation from the Departme nt of Education and really the colleges implement that program . So the colleges' responsibility is to develop the material, prepare the instructors, offer the instruct ion; rather than meeting with indust ry and outlining the need.

MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman, when I look at the annual report, which is a year old, but I look at the employment, or at least the staff numbers referred to in that particular report, and I'm looki ng now at page 52 dealing with the Red River Community College section. It says there are 650 full-time and 350 part-time staff dealing with so many students . Yet, when I compare that with the component that's in the supplementary financial things , granted there 's been a slight reduction in the number of staff years , but we're dealing with 739 as opposed to either 650 full-time or almost 1,000 total staff.

What is the correct figure and why do we have the two different figures? HON. J. STORIE: It would probably reflect the fact that there are contract staff involved that offer some programs, evening programs, etc., so that could account for the discrepa ncy. MR. C. BIRT: Mr. Chairman , then the SY's that are referred to in the supplementary, are they the full -time positions , not contract? HON. J. STORIE: That would be the full-time total. MR. C. BIRT: Well , Mr. Chairman , there 's still even a fair discrepancy of 100.

In the '86-87 , there were 748, and the annual report shows 650, just for the Community College . HON. J. STORIE: The 739 figure is not just full-time. That is comprised of 662 full-time, 42. 75 term , and 34.1 contract. Mr. Chairperson, I think the more comparable figures would be at the bottom of page 52 in the annual report. It references 650 full-time and the numbers I've just given you of the full-time this year. The others, the rest would be part -time staff , including evening classes. MR. C. BIRT: Mr.

Chairman, then if we look at the bottom of page 75 in the supplementary , where they show professional fees , then these are the fees that are paying the part-time, the 42 term and the 34 contract. Is that how I would read that? HON. J. STORIE: You're referr ing to the 271? MR. C. BIRT: Well, I'm looking at page 75 of the Suppl emen tary Estimates . . . HON. J. STORIE: And Professional Fees? MR. C. BIRT: There's Professional Fees down there .

I just realized that they can't be, because across for, let's call it 739 pos itions, whether they be full time or part time, there 's a salary component of some $26 .5 million. So then, what would be covered in the Professional Fees of 271 down below? HON. J. STORIE: Just so we 're clear , we're talking about the 271 that's referenced across . . MR. C. BIRT: The Profession al Fees for this coming year. HON. J. STORIE: Profe ssion al Fees.

The Professional Fees includes organization memberships, honorar ium s that are paid out to, I guess , people who offer services of one form or another, not contract teachers but individuals, guest lecturers and so forth . The largest share of that, approximately $130,000 represents student fees for Manpower students , in other words , fees that we collect and then pay to the Students ' Association. So it 's a transfer from Manpower to the college to the Students' Association. MR. C. BIRT : Then , Mr. Chairma

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-47
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 47.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ca0cda18fd648da78ed48cf18a26b6b0802616d6

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