Manitoba Hansard — 30 August 1988 (Sitting 26, 34th Legislature, 1st Session)

34-1-26

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 First Session - Thirty-Fourth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS (HANSARD) 37 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XXXVII No. 26- 1:30 p.m., TUESDAY, AUGUST 30, 1988. ISSN 0542-5492 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer, Province of Manitoba

Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation NAME CONSTITUENCY AlCOCK, Reg Os borne ANGUS, John St. Norbert ASHTON, Steve Thompson BURREll, Parker Swan River CARR,James Fort Rouge CARSTAIRS, Sharon River Heights CHARLES, Gwen Selkirk CHEEMA, Gulzar Kildonan CHORNOPYSKI, William Burrows CONNERY, Edward Hon. Portage la Prairie COWAN,Jay Churchill CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. Ste. Rose du Lac DERKACH, leonard, Hon. Roblin-Russell DOER, Gary Con cordia DOWNE Y, James Hon. Arthur DRIEDGER, Albert, Hon. Emerson DRIEDGER, Herold, l. Niakwa DUCHARME, Gerald, Hon. Riel EDWARDS, Paul St.

James ENNS, Harry Lakeside ERNST, Jim, Hon. Char leswood EVANS, laurie Fort Garry EVANS, leonard Brandon East FILMON, Gary, Hon. Tuxedo FINDLAY, Glen Hon. Virden GAUDRY, Neil St. Boniface GlllESHAMMER, Harold Minnedosa GRAY, Avis Ellice HAMMOND, Gerrie Kirkfield Park HARAPIAK, Harry The Pas HARPER, Elijah Rupertsland HELWER, Edward R. Gimli HEMPHill, Maureen Logan KOZAK, Richard, J. Transcona LAMOUREUX, Kevin, M. lnkster MALOWAY, Jim Elmwood MANDRAKE, Ed Assiniboia MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. Morris McCRAE, James Hon. Brandon West MINEN KO, Mark Seven Oaks MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. River East NEUFELD, Harold, Hon.

Rossmere OLESON, Charlotte Hon. Gladstone ORCHARD, Donald Hon. Pembina PANKRATZ, Helmut La Verendrye PATTERSON, Allan Radisson PENNER, Jack, Hon. Rhineland PlOHMAN, John Dauphin PRAZNIK, Damm Lac du Bonnet ROCAN, Denis, Hon. Turtle Mountain ROCH, Gilles Springfield ROSE, Bob St.

Vital STORIIE, Jerry Flin Flon TAYLOR, Harold Wolseley URUSKI, Bill lnterlake WAS YlYCIA-lEIS, Judy St YEO, lva Sturgeon Creek PARTY LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP PC LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL NDP PC PC LIBERAL PC LIBERAL PC NDP NDP PC NDP LIBERAL LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL PC PC LIBERAL PC PC PC PC PC LIBERAL PC NDP PC PC PC LIBERAL NDP LIBERAL NDP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, August 30, 1988. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Mr. Mark Minenko (C hairman of the Committee of the Whole House): Mr. Speaker, the Commi ttee of Ways and Means has considered a certain resolution, directs me to report progress and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honour able Memb er for Minnedosa (Mr . Gilleshammer), that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. READING AND RECEIVING PETITIONS Mr.

Speaker: In accordance with our Rule 81( 9), I have to revert back to Reading and Receiving Petitions where the Honourable Member for Flin Flon (Mr . Storie) has presented his petition. According to our Rules, the Hono urable Memb er has to, the da y following presenting petitions, present this. Does the Honou rable Memb er have leave in order to present this petition? (Agreed) I have reviewed the petition and it conforms with the privileges and practices of the House and complies with the Rules.

Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? (U.S . waste-H udson Bay Mining and Smelting, Flin Flon) PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMM ITTEES (Cont'

d) Hon. James McCrae (Attorney-General): Mr. Speaker, before moving to Min isterial Statements and Tabling of Reports, I beg to present the First Report of the Special Comm ittee of Seven Persons, appointed to prepare a list of Memb ers of the Standing Committees ordered by the House. Mr. Clerk, William Remnant: Agriculture (1 1): Mrs. Charles; Mr. Chornopyski; Hon. Mr. Cummings; Messrs. Enns, Evans (Fort Garry); Hon. Mr. Findlay; Messrs. Helwer, Patterson; Hon. Mr. Penner; Messrs. Plohman, Uruski. Economic Development ( 11 ): Messrs. Alcock, Angus; Hon. Messrs. Conner y, Ernst; Messrs.

Evans (F ort Garry), Evans (Bran don East), Gaud ry, Helwer; Hon. Mr. Neufeld; Messrs. Pan kratz, Uruski. 885 Ind ustrial Relations (1 1): Messrs. Ashton, Burrell, Cheema; Hon. Mr. Connery; Messrs. Doer, Edwards; Hon. Mr. Ernst; Messrs. Patterson, Praznik, Roch; Ms. Wasylycia-Leis. Law Amendments (11) : Messrs. Burrell, Carr, Cowan; Hon. Mr. Ducharme; Messrs. Edwards, Enns; Ms. Gray; Messrs. Harapiak, Mandrake; Hon. Mrs. Mitchelson; Hon. Mr. Orchard. Muni cipal Affairs (11) : Mr. Angus; Mrs. Charles; Hon. Messrs. Cummin gs, Derkach, Downey; Messrs. Enns, Evans (Brandon East), Pankratz, Plohman, Rose, Taylor.

Pr ivate Bills ( 11) : Me ssrs. Angus, Chornop ysk i, Gilleshammer; Ms. Gray; Mr s. Ha mmond; Me ssrs. Harapiak, Harper, Kozak, Ma loway; Hon. Mr. Man ness; Mr. Praznik. Privileges and Elections (11) : Messrs. Cheema, Cowan; Hon. Messrs. Derkach, Downey; Messrs. Harapiak, Helwer, Lamoureux; Hon. Mr. McCrae; Messrs. Minenko, Praznik; Mrs. Yeo. Public Accounts ( 11 ): Mr . Bur rel l; Hon. Me ssrs. Derkach, Driedger (E merson); Messrs. Drie dger (N iakwa), Gaudr y, Gilleshammer; Ms. Hemphill; Mr. Kozak; Hon. Mr. Man ness; Messrs. Rose, Storie. Pub lic Util ities and Natural Resources (11) : Mrs. Charles; Hon. Mr.

Cummings; Messrs. Doer, Driedger (N iakwa); Ho n. Mr. Findla y; Messrs. Gilleshamm er, Harper; Hon. Messrs. Neufeld, Orchard; Messrs. Storie, Taylor. Rules of the House (12 ): Messrs. Alcock, Ashton, Cowan; Hon. Mr. Downey; Mr. Lamoureux; Hon. Messrs. McCrae, Man ness; Mr. Minenko; Hon. Mr. Rocan; Mr. Roch; Ms. Wasylycia-Leis; Mrs. Yeo. Statutory Regulations and Orders ( 11 ): Mr. Carr; Ms. Gray, Ms. Hemphill; Hon. Mr. McCrae; Messrs. Maloway, Mandr ake; Hon. Mr. Manness; Hon. Mrs. Mitchelson; Mr. Pankr atz; Hon. Mr. Penner; Mrs. Yeo. Mr. McCrae: Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honour able Opposition House Leader (Mr. Alcock), that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MIN ISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Glen Findlay (Minis ter of Agriculture): I would like to table six reports: The Prairie Agricu ltur al Machi nery Institute Thir teenth Annual Report for 1986-87; The University of Manitoba-Faculty of Agriculture 34th Annual Progress Review, January 1988; The Mani toba Beef Commission Annual Report, 1986-87;

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 The Agriculture Annual Report, 1986-87; The Ma nito ba Cr op Insuranc e Corporation Annual Report, 1986-87; and The Manitoba Milk Prices Review Commission Annual Report, 1986-87. * (13 35) Hon. Edward Connery (Mi nister of labour): I would like to table the Annual Report of the Department of Labour for 1987-88. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Medical Records Privacy Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae).

Yesterday, the Government of Alberta released their agreement with CSIS, an agreement which I have now obtained, and Alberta has refused to allow access to the detailed health and hospital records of Albertans. My question is: Will the Attorney-General now admit that he signed this agreement hastily and without any consultation with the Man itoba Association of Rights and Lib erties, hospital organi za tions and other interested groups? Hon. James McCr ae (Attorn ey-Gener al): The Government of Manitoba has refused to allow the free and easy access to CSIS of people's health records in the Province of Man itoba.

Mrs. Carstairs: With a supplementary question to the Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae). Can the Attorney-General explain to this House why he did not consult with other provinces who had signed agreements, in that the Alberta agreement not only excludes Health, but also excludes Energy and Min es; Consumer and Corporate Affairs; Culture, Heritage and Recreation; the Civil Service, etc., etc.? Mr. McCrae: In the Province of Mani toba, everything is excluded, save and except locator information. CSIS Agreement Mrs. Sharon Carstairs {leader of the Opposition): Will the Attorney-General (Mr .

McCrae) now negotiate a new agreement with CSIS which specifically details the information which is accessible to CS IS and equally clarifies that information which will not be accessible to CSIS? Hon. James McCrae (Attorney-General): I should let the Ho nour able Leader of the Opp osition (Mr s.

Carstairs) know that in regard to calls by her critic and by herself for amendments to the agreement, the spokesman reported in the Winnipeg Free Press-the spokesman from the Health Sciences Centre- had occasion to call my office this morning and dissociated himself from comments reported in the Winnipeg Free Press about supporting Liberal calls yesterday for amendments to the agreement. Mrs. Carstairs: What that has to do with the question is irrelevant. 886 CSIS Agreement Information Security Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (leader of the Opposition): With a new question to the Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae).

My colleague, the Memb er for Kildonan (Mr. Cheema), and his community had their entire community called into serious question last year when information about Sikh organizations was first provided from CSIS to the Min ister of External Affairs, the Honour able Joe Clark, and then provided to the Premier of this province and then acted upon, to some degree, by Memb ers of the then caucus of the Government of the province with no questions ever raised as to its accu racy. Now, according to this agreement, the information is going to flow both ways.

Will the Attorney-General tell this Ho use what protect ion is av aila ble for memb ers of the Sikh community and other ethnocultural organizations who deal with the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation, and which department now has direct access to CSIS? Hon. James McCrae (Attorney-General): Mr. Speaker, as with any other department, the procedure in place is that any information other than locator information must be the subject of a request directly to my office regarding culture, regarding health or whatever is included in the agreement. Quite contrary to what the Leader of the Opposition (Mrs.

Carstairs) continues to suggest, the agreement has the effect of stemming the flow of information rather than encouraging the flow of information. Just in regard to that, since March 11, even previous to the agreement, there have been a total of 12 requests for information from the Department of Health and none of those requests have been for anything more than locator information. The CSIS organization knows better than to ask for anything more-certainly since the agreement, knows better than to ask for more.

If they do ask for more, such requests have to come through my office and are not readily available through the departments, as the Leader of the Opposition continues to suggest, which does the whole process a di sservice because that is leaving incorr ect information on the record. Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, the Opposition would feel more comfortable if anywhere in the agreement the words, "locator information" were in fact placed.

Will the Attorney-General provide to this House a list of the instructions to the designated persons who will give out information and make it available to all Memb ers of this House? Mr. McCrae: I will take that request under advisement, but I do suggest that the Honour able Leader of the Opposition is flogging away at a dead horse-a horse that really died on June 15. The horse died on June 15 when the matter of the security of information regarding Manitobans was taken care of and made

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 more secure by virtue of this Government signing an agreement on June 15. • (13 40) Mrs. Carstairs: With a final supplementary to the Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae). Will the Attorney-General remove the Civil Service Commission, the Legislative Assembly, the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation, the Department of Energy and Mines and the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs from the present CSIS Agreement in that other provinces have not included access to those departments? Mr. McCrae: Mr.

Speaker, if the Honourable Member can cite for me a case of a Manitoban's interests not being served or of a Manitoba n's priv acy being unreasonably invaded or breached, I would be very happy-! would be very concerned, No. 1- but I would also be very happy to discuss that case with the Honou rable Leader of the Opposition (Mr s. Carstairs).

If the Honourable Member can bring to my attention any breach of anybody's privacy that goes beyond the realm of what is reasonable to protect the national security, I wish the Honourable Leader of the Opposition would bring that to me because I can assure her that I would handle that matter with the utmost attention and I would be very concerned indeed. Grain Elevator Closures Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Mini ster of Hi gh ways and Transportation (Mr . Driedger).

Recently, there has been a rash of elevator closures throughout this province and I am concerned that this is even going to get worse. Cargill has closed its facility in Pine River and the Cowan subdivision with very little notice to the farmers. Manitoba Pool Elevators have indicated that they intend to close five elevators at Centenn ial, Ha zelridge, Oak Lake, Menteith and McDonald. The United Grain Growers have indicated that they are planning on closing 14 or more facilities throughout this province. We do not know how many more are being planned by the various grain companies.

These closings are further adding to the despair of many farm families who are already faced with low com modi ty prices, with the dr ought and with bank ruptcies. Has the Minister of Transportation communicated with the grain companies to determine whether their closures are temporary because of the drought or whether these are in fact permanent closures-that they are using the drought simply as an excuse to close? Hon. Albert Driedger (Min ister of Highways and Transportation): No, I have not commun icated with them, but I wilL it regrettable that the Minister has communicate- Mr. Speaker: With a question. Mr.

Plohman: -with these grain companies on this very serious issue. Cargill has closed its facility, as I ind icated, on the Cowan subdiv ision that the CN endeavoured to abandon only last year.

Why has this Minister not demanded justification of these closures, based on the long-term throughput of these facilities, so he could assure this House that the drought is not being used as a cruel excuse by the grain companie s to fu rther abandon their responsibilities and services in rural Manitoba, and so he could assure this House that the grain companies are not in any way simply working hand-in-hand with the railways to assist them in their rail abandonment procedures in this province? * (13 45) Mr.

Driedger: First of all, I believe that many of the grain companies are farmer-owned and the farmers themselves all play an integral

part in terms of what is happening. So that part of the accusation that the Member is making is unjustified. As I indicated before, I will be writing to ask for a clarification as to whether these closings are based on the drought, on the short-term basis or the long-term basis. Mr. Plohman: I regret that the Minister is making excuses for these grain companies and taking- Mr. Speaker: With a question. Mr. Plohman: -their side on this issue.-(lnterjection) The side? The side that the same grain companies were intent on closing Churchill, I might add, for the Mi nister's information. Grain Elevator Closures Mr.

John Plohman (Dauphin): I ask the First Mi nister (Mr . Filmon), since he is here: Will he intervene on behalf of the families and commun ities that are affected by these closures in rural Manitoba? Will he personally intervene and call an inquiry to determine whether in fact these closures are justified, whether there are alternative services available to these farmers and communities who are affected by these closures, and what the total costs are going to be as a result of these closures? Will he call an inquiry so the facts can be on the table, so we can ensure there is equity in rural Manitoba? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): Members on this side do not have to be lectured about standing up for the farm commun ity. We have always stood up for the farm community and for rural Manitoba. lt is unfortunate that it has taken the Member for Dauphin (Mr . Plohman) so long to realize that there is a drought in western Canada, that there are serious problems within our farm comm unity, that they have many, many difficulties to face and they are

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 compounded by other events around that lead to pressures on the Port o! Churchill, pressures on rail lines for abandonment and all of those things elevators closing. All of these things are a concern to our Government and they are something that our Government will take action on and ensure that we do everything possible to support the viability of rural communities in Manitoba. Mr. Plohman: Why will this First Mi nister (Mr . Filmon) not take action on behalf of those communities and families that are affected by elevator closures and rail abandonment?

Why is he intent on making excuses for those companies instead of taking the side of those families who are affected by this abandonment? Mr. Filmon: Over 60 percent of these elevators are owned and operated by farmer-owned companies. These are decisions that are taken democratically by the people in the farm community who are anxious to preserve their own viability and their own financial support. We will stand up for and support the farmers of Manitoba.

At all things that we do, and all ways that we develop policy for the future of this province, we will be standing up for it, ensuring that we support the viability of the farm communities of Manitoba. Medical Records Privacy Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): My question is for the Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae). Myself and my Leader have repeatedly, in this House, been told by the Honourable Attorney-General, in response to questions, that we were misinformed, inaccurate; but we well know, as the Attorney-General knows, that we have been right every time.

Conversely, quite the contrary, yesterday, in this House, the Attorney-General told the Members of this House that the Freedom of Information Act would protect Manitobans' health records from CSIS. I was pleased to inform the Attorney-General about

Section 64( 1) of that Act which provides a specific override for a Government instrument such as the CS IS agreement. Mr. Speaker, will the Attorney-General please give this House his revised opinion as to the non-protection of this Act? * (13 50) Hon.

James McCr ae (Attorn ey-Gener al ): The Honourable Member did, indeed, ask for an opinion, which is not something that he can ask for under the Rules, but I am given the opportunity to rise in my place, which is something I am pleased to be able to do, especially on the issue of the agreement between the Province of Manitoba and the Canadian Security Intelligence Agency. lt gives me the opportunity to ask the Honourable Member-and maybe before he answers the question, he might check with his Leader to see if they are on the same gro und - but do Ho nou rable Memb ers opposite in the Official Opposition support the Freedom of Information Act or do they not? 888 Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The Honourable Member for St. James. Mr. Edwards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course we support the Freedom of Information Act. What we do not support is the sell-out that this Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae) has given CSIS, and other provinces have not. We have been sold down the river and he knows it. A supplementary question: The Attorney-General of Alberta released 76 statutes that protect Albertans' rights in various areas which CS IS is going to be looking into, and if they have not already, who is to say they will not?

Is that the Attorney-General's position for the people of this province? What list of Manitoba statutes has been made, if any, that gives that kind of protection to Manitobans? Did the Attorney-General have that list before him when he signed this agreement, or did he just sign it? Mr. McCrae: I am having trouble getting through to the Honourable Member; and considering the way he asks his questions, maybe that is understandable in this situation. I remind the Honourable Member and his Leader that prior to that agreement there was a very informal process.

Yesterd ay, during the Interim Supply discussions, I referred to it as a loosey-goosey kind of agreement that we had prior to June 15 in terms of the procedures and safeguards that were in place to protect the privacy of Manitobans.

The fact is, if I had felt otherwise, I would never have signed the agreement on June 15 , but I felt at that time that Manitobans' privacy was something that should be regarded as sacred and something that should be safeguarded, and the Government should be there to protect the right of Manitobans to privacy respecting their health records or any other records that you might name that are in the hands of Government. Therefore, I signed the agreement, Mr. Speaker, to put into place a procedure that must be adhered to when CSIS seeks information.

The Honourable Member should understand that just because CS IS seeks information from the Government of Manitoba does not mean that CSIS is going to be given that information. I remind the Honourable Member that since March 11, as I told his Leader a little while ago, since March 11 there have been 12 requests for information from the MH SC and those requests have all been locator information -name, address, type of information. Any information that goes beyond that, there is another procedure that clicks in and the Honourable Member should be told that maybe a few more limes- Mr. Speaker: Order. Mr.

McCrae: -b efore he actually understands it. Mr. Speaker: The Member for St. James, with a final supplementary.

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 Mr. Edwards: If you want to talk about loosey-goosey, read this agreement. You read it! Mr. Speaker: Where is the question? Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in this House, the Attorney-General- An Honourable Member: Question. Mr. Edwards: Given that the Attorney-General (Mr . McCrae) said

Section 2 protected Manitobans, my question is: Given that paragraph 2 says terms and conditions can be opposed, where are those terms and conditions in this agreement? Why are they not in this agreement? Manitobans are relying on the word of mouth between civil servants and the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General, according to this agreement, will not even know necessarily if health record inqui ries were made. Mr. McCrae: The Honourable Member is certainly dead wrong again on who is going to know.

The Honourable Member wants to see in black and white CS IS agreeing to something that CSIS has no power to agree or not to agree to. The fact is it is our responsibility as a Government to refuse to make available or to make available, as the case may be. CS IS can ask for the moon if it wants, but as a responsible Government, this Government is not going to grant information about people which CSIS ought not to have.

The Freedom of Information Act is very much a part of the process that guides this Government. lt is legislation to which we are committed, and I wish we could see more of a concrete commitment on the part of the Li beral Party in this place to free dom of information in Manitoba and the protection of the privacy of individuals in Manitoba. • (1 355) Foster Care Telephone Survey Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne): Since we are talking about information, I do have a question for the First Mini ster (Mr . Filmon).

I would like to begin by commanding him for following my Lead er's advic e and getting involv ed in the negotiations with the foster parents. We were a little concerned yesterday, however, when the Min ister of Community Services (Mrs. Oleson) admitted in this House that they had used a private telemarketing firm to contact foster parents. We are wondering-since the information that is normally gathered by the department about people is confidential and not released unless those persons consent to it, did the officials of the department release any information that was of this nature? Hon.

Gary filmon (Pr emier): Wh at natur e of information is the Member referring to? I can tell the 889 Member that the information that those who are doing the survey were armed with was only the names, addresses and the telephone numbers of the people. No other information whatsoever was available to them. (lnterjection)-Pardon me? An Honourable Member: What were they doing, checking where they lived? Mr. filmon: They were the lists of foster parents. For the Member for St. Nor bert (Mr .

Angus), they were lists of foster parents in the province and the only information available to those telephoning was name, address and phone num ber. If the Member for St. Norbert will wake up, he will know that we are talking about foster parents in this issue. Mr. Alcock: I thank the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) for that answer. As the Minister of Community Services (Mrs. Oleson) was reluctant yesterday to give us the name of the firm, perhaps the First Minister is now able to do that. Mr. fiimon: As the Member for Osborne (Mr.

Alcock) began-inc identally, I must compliment him for his first questions in the House, and I appreciate the fact that he is asking some questions on an issue of vital concern to all Mani to bans. I als o appr eciate the acknowledgement that he has given about my personal involvement in the negotiations and discussions with the Manitoba Foster Parents Association with the hope -(Interjection)-The Member for Dauphin (Mr . Plohman) wants to kno w where the Mi nister of Commu nity Services is.

She is looking after the affairs of her department and attempting to arrive at a solution to a problem that we find serious, not one to be laughed at as the Member for Dauphin is. The president of the Manitoba Foster Parents Association, who is currently meeting with the Minister of Commu nity Services, is from the Mem ber for Dauphin's constituency. She is concerned with solving the problem, even though he is not. Mr. Speaker, I will ask the Member for Osborne (Mr . Alcock), as I will other Members, to bear with us.

We are in what I believe are the final stages of arriving at a Memoran dum of Un de rstan din g to avoid th e moratorium being implemented on foster child ren in Manitoba. The Mem bers for Elmw ood (Mr . Ma loway) and Thomp son (Mr . Ashton)-the Bob bsey twins- are anxious to get involved in the debate. I want to answer the question. If I do not get interrupted, I will answer the question.

I will commit to the Member for Osborne and to the House that tomorrow, or after we have arrived at an agreement and a resolution to the problem, I will provide the House with the name of the polling firm and the amount of money expended on the polling. I do not want to get further involved in discussions of this issue because we are close to a resolution of the issue. I do not want to start discussing information that may cause further irritations between ourselves and foster parents.

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 We are anxious to ensure that we bring this to a satisfactory conclusion and we want nothing to interrupt the process. Mr. Alcock: Mr. Speaker, I do wish to assure the First Minister (Mr . Filmon) that I would be first on my feet congratulating him if they are able to solve this problem. Nobody benefits from the battle that is going on between the foster parents and the Government at this time. However, I do have a concern about the actions of the Government while this process was under way.

The Premier has offered to table the nam e of the organization that was used and the amount of money this has cost. I would also ask if he would please table the questions that were used during the survey? Mr. Filmon: I have indicated what I am prepared to do. I would ask the Member to bear with us to see this process come to a resolution that is reasonable for the Foster Parents Association and that will help us to avoid the moratorium and will be a benefit to the children who are in foster care in Manitoba. We do not want to discuss any further issues that may inflame or aggravate the situation.

I will be happy to enter into debate, discussion, or response to his questions after we have resolved the situation or otherwise. If he has criticisms of our Government, or our Min ister, or me, for the way in which we have handled things, I will say to him that you will have ample opportunity to make those criticisms public, and we will have an opportunity to discuss and deba te whether or not our actions were fair and reasonable, whether or not we arrived at a conclusion through proper means, and whether or not it is a satisfactory conclusion.

We will be subject to all of his criticisms, I know, and we will be happy to respond to those criticisms; but at the present time, I would like him to just leave aside the issues surround ing these people at the Foster Parents Association in the interest of having it settled within the next 24 hours. * (14 00) AIDS Education Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minis ter of Education): Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I took a question as notice from the Member for Fort Rouge (Mr . Carr), and I would like to provide him with the details of that particular question at this time.

The question was with regard to in-servicing for the AIDS Program, and I would like to inform the House and the Member that as of today about 700 teachers in the public school system, as well as a number of teachers in the private schools and Indian bands, have already been in-serviced with regard to the AIDS Program -the mandatory AIDS Program that is being offered across the province. At the present time, one-day workshops are being planned for teachers during this year.

Those workshops will be made av ailable to teachers between the 890 November and February months of the school year and these workshops will be led by qualified personnel from Manitoba Health, Manitoba Education, and supported by local medical professionals.

The goals of the AIDS instruction program is to ensure that school divisions have an adequate grasp of the factual information pertaining to AIDS. lt is to familiarize participants with th e contents of the Ma nitoba Education teachers' support materials on AIDS and to present information and encourage discussion on methods and techniques whereby participants can act as suppor ts and resource persons for other staff colleagues. I hope this information is adequa te for the Mem ber. Free Trade Agreement Hydro Rate Setting Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): Today, in our national House of Commons, there is a very important debate going on in terms of the proposed Free Trade Agreement with the United States, and indeed, the vote will take place tomorrow that will affect not only Canadians but indeed, we believe, will very seriously impact in a negative way on Manitobans. In previous occasions both the Minister of Energy (Mr . Neufeld), in this House, indeed July 25, and the Premier (Mr . Filmon), on the same day, indicated that we could sell our hydro-electric energy at rates at whatever we would like to sell them at.

I would ask the First Min ister (Mr. Filmon): In light of the statements from Clayton Yeutter, the Trade representative, and the former secretary of the Treasury, James Baker, what the effects of the agreements will be, in their words, to assure non-discriminatory access to Canadian energy supplies, does the Premier feel that the assessment of the U.S. trade people is accurate or is it the statements that he and his Min isters have made in terms of this proposed trade agreement, the accurate int erpr eta tion of this very im portant document? Hon.

Gary Filmon (Premier): We have indicated in the past that we recognize that we would be inhibited from selling our energy at below cost or at unfairly subsidized rates to Manitoba consumers. We say that is something that no Government should want to do in Mani toba, to sell to a particular client and customer at a rate below cost so that all of the users of Manitoba Hydro have to subsidize that particular user. If the Member for Concordia (Mr.

Doer) believes that we ought to sell it at a subsid ized rate to a particular industry or large user so that his constituents in Concordia will have to pay a greater rate in order to subsidize some industries, then I disagree with that completely, totally and vehemently. I say that he would be doing a disservice to not only his constituents but to all people in Manitoba in entering into that kind of agreement. I am glad that the Free Trade Agreement prevents us from doing that.

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 Man. Hydro legal Opinion Mr. Gary Doer (leader of the Second Opposition): With the greatest respect to the First Minister (Mr. Filmon), he has received a legal opinion on June 8 that very clearly raises very serious questions and doubts about Manitoba's future ability to make a made-in Manitoba price in terms of energy and hydro-electric pricing. We are not talking about below cost here; we are talking about a legal opinion that he has not tabled in this House on any occasion.

Would the First Minister please table that legal opinion to support his position about the future pricing of Manitoba Hydro? Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): That issue has been looked at by many experts. I repeat, for the benefit of the Member for Concordia (Mr .

Doer), that we are not able to sell our energy at below cost or at an unfairly subsidized rate to people in this country because of the fact that it would be unfair to all of the consumers of Manitoba Hydro; that all of our consumers and all of our constituents should not have to subsidize a major user for whatever benefit he wants to attribute to that process. That would be unfair to the people of Manitoba and we would not enter it. I am ashamed at the fact that he would enter into such an agreement. lt just shows how right the people of Manitoba were in turfing out his admi nistration. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for Concordia, with a final supplementary. Mr. Doer: The First Minister knows that the legal opinion that his office and he received do es not allo w preferential pricing with hydro between Manitobans and the Americans in the future. I would ask him to table this legal opinion to back up his rhetoric because the New Democrats will table a legal opinion today showing his position to Manitobans has been wrong all along in this Free Trade Agreement. Mr.

Filmon: Previous NDP Governments entered into agreements to sell our energy to the Americans at cheaper rates than it is being sold to Manitobans. They have done that and the Free Trade Agreement does not prevent that from happening. That is the kind of bad busine ss agreements that they entered into when they were in Government and they carried on because they some how thought that was a good way to sell energy. We do not agree with that and we are not going to carry on with that kind of crazy business. PCBs Safety and Storage Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, guess what?

My qu estion is for the Min ister of Labour and Environment (Mr . Con nery) again. All along, this Environment Mini ster has consistently denied any responsibility for the PCB laden boxcar out in the North Transcona CPR Yards. He has stated on 891 many occasions that the yards are federally regulated and it is only Otta wa's problem. Pure fant asy.

Environment Canada Guidelines indicate that handling and storage of PCBs is primarily the responsibility of the Provincial Government and the provincial Minister of the Environment and to ensure also that Environment Canada plays its adequa te role for the areas under federal jurisdiction. When will this Mini ster reassure anxious Manitobans by taking responsibility for a change on those PCBs, and PCBs in general, contained in this province in storage dumps? Hon. Edward Connery (Minister of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health): At no time did we ever abandon any rights on federal property.

We have worked cooperatively with Environment Canada at all times. We had our staff visit the rail car with Environment Canada staff to ensure that the car was safe. There were concerns raised that there were two locations on CP rail with PCBs. There are three barrels in one car at the Transcona Yard and there is one barrel at the Weston Yard. There were concerns as to why there were two locations. So we had our people work with Environment Canada. I have a one-page letter from Environment Canada to Mr. D.J. McMillan, Superintendent of the Winnipeg Division of CP Rail.

We hope that we have a resolve to this issue because our department and our Government is very concerned about PCBs. lt says, "Further to our telephone conversation of August 29, 19 88," -t hat is not very long "E nvironment Canada's current recommendations for improved PCB storage at CP Transcona Yards are as follows: ( 1) Pad locking of the boxcar" -and I say that the padlocking of the boxcar does nothing more than what was there because the bolt was safer than the padlock, but we will ensure if that is what they want they will have that. This has visually been confirmed by one of my inspectors.

"Mo ving the boxcar closer to the Transcona Yard office so that either CPR shift personnel or a night watchman would be present on a 24-hour-a-day basis." The site shown to my inspectors is satisfactory. "B rush is removed from around the new site in order to minim ize the risk of fire. The boxcar should be opened once every two months and the drums storing the capacitors visually inspected.

A list of contents stored in the boxcar should be maintained in the boxcar." That is basically the intent of the recommendations and so the department has worked very quickly to improve the situation-a situation that all department people thought was safe, but because there were concerns raised, we ensured that we would do it and try to make them satisfied that it is safer. Mr. Taylor: Some progress, some progress.

Given that the federal Min ister of the Environment also says that there should be standards for buildings, fences and signs by a statement he made on national radio last Friday, when are you going to complete the last of the clean-up to make that storage area safe?

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 * (1410 ) Mr. Connery: Mr. Speaker, to the Member for that question. We are working with Environment Canada continuous ly. As I mentioned earlier, we were going to reinspect every site in Manitoba to ensure that it is safe. If there is a site that is not safe, we will take remedial action. I would also like to say to the Member and to this House, Mr. Speaker, that we are embarking on having a special meeting of the Environment Min isters and Mr. McMi llan in October when we are having our annual meeting here around the middle of October.

This issue is taken very seriously and we are writing for them to cooperate with us to develop, if we need to, stricter regulations to ensure that the storage of PCBs is safe. We are also working on a Transportation of Hazardous or Dangerous Goods Admin istration and Enforcement Arrangements Agreement with the federal Government so that if we do have to move any of these dangerous PCBs, or as a matter of fact, any hazardous material, we will ensure that it is done in the very safest way. PCBs Storage Sites Location Mr. Harold Taylor (Wolseley): A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

In view of the federal En vironment Minister 's adm ission that ther e is an incomple te listing or accounting or inventory of PCB sites across Canada, including Manitoba, just what is this Minister doing to rectify that situation so that we know that there is a full inventory of PCB storage sites in Manitoba and that there is proper sharing of information between the two levels of Go vernment and, if necessa ry, interprovincially, for a change so that we do not have these gaps in information flow and the potential for disaster to happen because somebody is not talking to somebody else. Hon.

Edward Connery (Min ister of Environment and Workplace Safety and Health): Last Friday, there was a conference call with our staff and people from across Canada to discuss the issue because of the unfortunate incident in Quebec. Something like that is a tragedy. lt was by error, obviously; somebody was not doing their job. Our department, in cooperation with Environment Canada, will ensure that every PCB site is located and is investigated and inspected to make sure that it is safe.

We will make sure th at all information is cooperated between the two levels of Government so we both know where the federal and provincial storage sites are to ensure that we do not have a disaster like we had in Quebec. Tha t is the last thing that any Member in this Legislature wants. Our departments will work to their very best to ensure that this never happens in Manitoba. Foster Care Telephone Survey Ms. Judy Wa sylycia-Leis (St. Johns): My question is for the Premier (Mr . Filmon).

I would like to start my question by saying we are also hopeful about the negotiations with the Manitoba Foster Parents Association, and I will respect the Premier's wishes with respect to not asking a question about the dispute, as he puts it. My question has not to do with the dispute but with the stonewalling of the Government yesterday with respect to the questions asked in the phone campaign on the weekend of the Manitoba foster parents.

Could the Premier indicate today, given that obviously his offices have been involved, and given that political staff apparently were involv ed in the writing of the questions, could he indicate today what those questions were that were posed to the Manitoba foster parents and would he table the questionnaire today? Hon. Gary Fil mon (Premier): Mr . Speak er, as I indicated to the Member for Osborne (Mr . Alcock), I will deal with those questions tomorrow. If the Member for St. Johns (Ms.

Wasylycia-Leis) is not satisfied with my answers tomorrow, she can enter into discussion, debate, criticism, whatever she chooses, about the manner in which I have handled the situation. My Government has responded to a very serious concern of ours.

I do not think that it is productive and I do not think that it benefits an attempt to solve the differences and resolve the problem that we face with respect to a moratorium on foster care in this province by continuing to raise the issue when we are almost at an agreement with the Manitoba Foster Parents Association. 892 If the Member insists, then I can only assume that she is not interested in solving the problem or resolving the differences that we have, but that she just simply wants to make some political hay out of it, and I do not think that is the right thing to do when we are dealing with the lives of foster children in Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for St. Johns has time for one final supplementary question. Ms. Wa sylycia-Leis: We, on this side of the House, are not trying to cause any difficulties with respect to the sensitive negotiations. We are trying to get some answers to a problem caused by this Government and get some clarification of Government policy. I would like to know from the First Minister (Mr .

Filmon), given that he will not table the questions today in the Hous e, why this Government posed questions to the foster parents of Manitoba that included how they felt about taking money from an association to give to foster parents; how they felt about the Government's original proposal; how they !ell about the Manitoba Foster Parents Association proposal; and how that gave the Government any new information for resolving this dispute or for dealing with the situation in the event that a moratorium would take place.

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 Mr. Filmon: I must say that I cannot abide the hypocrisy of the New Democrats in this House. Over the past year or two, we have had them spending public money by the tens and hundr eds of thousands on polling with respect to the takeover of ICG, polling with respect to their views on Crown corporations, with respect to their views on Government priorities and actions; and on free trade, on ICG, on Crown corps, on all of those things, they refused to tell us who did the polling, what the polling costs, or any piece of information with respect to that.

I have told the Member that I will give this House information with respect to the name of the firm and with respect to the cost of that poll tomorrow, or at such time as we have arrived at a conclusion to the discussions between us and the foster parents. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would ask the Honourable First Minister-the word "hypocrisy" is under the terms of unparliamentary language; therefore, withdraw the word. The Honourable Government House Leader. Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Reference to the words "hypocrites" and "hypocrisy," you will find on both lists. Mr.

Jay Cowan (Second Opposition House Leader): On the point of order, as the Government House Leader (Mr . McCr ae) should realize, on many occasions in this House, Members have been asked to withdraw the word "hypocrisy." I am certain if he gave the First Mini ster (Mr . Filmon) the opportunity to withdraw the word "hypocrisy," he would follow the tradition which has been well-established by all Honourable Members in this House and in this Chamber in so withdrawing that remark. As the Government House Leader did indicate, it does show up in both lists, but what he neglected to mention, Mr.

Speaker, was the reference in Beauchesne to comments which are personal and cause heat and disorderliness in this House. Now those are the types of comments, in the use of the word "hypocrisy," that do offend that citation of Beauchesne, and I would ask the Government House Leader (Mr. McCrae) to allow his First Mi nister (Mr . Filmon) the opportunity to follow the tradition of all Honourable Mem bers and withdraw that offensive word. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Member for Churchill. The Honourable First Minister. Mr.

Filmon: Ha ving sat in this Hous e for some considerable length of time, and having watched New Democrats on this side of the House utilize words like "hypocrisy" time and time again and refuse to withdraw them as the former Member for Transcona did when he sat in this House, I have come to know what Beauchesne calls for, and I know that Beauchesne has ruled that the word "hypocrisy" is both unacceptable and acceptable. 893 I will follow the precedent that was set by New Democrats in the last term of this Legislature, which was that they did not choose to withdraw the word "hypocrisy," particularly when it is so appropriate. * (1 420) Mr.

Speaker: I have asked the Honourable Fi rst Minister to withdraw the word "hypocrisy." I find it does create some confusion. The Honourable First Minis ter to withdraw. Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, only because I have such respect for your judgment, I will withdraw the word "hypocrisy." Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable First Minister. The time for oral questions has expired. MATTER OF PRIVIL EGE Mr. Jay Cowan (Second Opposition House leader): Mr.

Speaker, I rise today on a most serious matter of privilege which has serious implications on all of our abilities as Memb ers of the Legislature to perform our duties in this Chamb er. 1t is also important that I clearly indicate, at the start of my remarks, that although the matter I am dealing with deals with your duties as Speaker, it is not intended nor should it be construed as any reflection upon yourself or upon your office. I will be concluding my remarks with a substantive motion allowing the House the opportunity to take specific action.

This is the first opportunity I have had to raise this matter as it deals with the matter contained in the Votes and Proceed ings for August 26 and the Hansard for the same day. In keeping with the requirement that Memb ers take care to. ascertain the full facts of a matter before bringing it to the attention of the House, and having taken the time to carefully review both the Hansard and the Votes and Proceed ings, and having taken the time to consult with others who heard the actual proceedings on that day, it is just now that I have been able to confirm the facts I am now presenting.

As well, this is the first opportunity for me to present the matter of privilege because it is just now that we have established committees of the House and I will be referring this matter to one of those comm ittees. So it would have been impossible to have referred the matter to a committee before that committee had been struck. I will also put before you, Mr. Speaker, a prima facie case that a breach of privilege of all Members of the Hous e has occurred. I believe this breach to be sufficiently involved to justify it being given precedence over the other business of the House.

As way of backgr ound, on July 21, 1988, the opening day of this Session, the Premier (Mr . Filmon) moved

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 the following motion: "that the Votes and Proceedings of the House be printed, having first been perused by the Speaker, and that the Speaker do appoint the printing thereof, and that no person but such as the Speaker shall appoint do presume to print the same." That motion was agreed to by unanimous consent, or a unanimous vote of the Legislature. I make that point because obviously the Votes and Proceedings are an extremely important part of us in our duties in fulfilling our responsibilities as legislators in this Cham ber.

As a matter of fact, the Votes and Proceedings are the official minutes of the Legislature. For that reason, they must be accurate and they must truly reflect upon what has actually transpired in this Chamb er. On the other hand, the Deba tes and Proceedings, commonly referred to as Hansard, is a verbatim report of the Members' speeches. Accord ing to the ruling of Mr. Speaker Fox, on April 4, 1972, "Speeches either help or hinder a proceeding, but they are not a proceeding.

Hansard is a verbatim report of a Member's speeches. lt is not an official record of the proceedings of the House." I think it is important to emphasize that Hansard is not the official proceeding; however, Votes and Proceedings are in fact the official minutes of the House. lt would therefore seem logical to conclude that when Votes and Proceedings are in conflict with, or indeed, contradict Hansard, that the Votes and Proceedings, as the official minutes, stand as the record of the House. This background brings me to the issue which I consider to be a breach of privilege.

On August 26, 1988, you made a ruling on the matter of urgent public importance, which was moved by my colleague, the Member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia Leis), which called upon the Conservative Government to immed iately present a compromised proposal to the Manitoba Foster Parents as a means of breaking the im passe in the negoti ations. In that ruling, you concluded with the following statement: "With respect, I must find that the Honourable Member's proposed motion to set aside the business of the House is out of order because the matter raised does not meet the required conditions." End of statement.

That is how I recollect having heard your ruling. I believe, Sir, upon recollection that is how you will remember having presented that ruling. I think all Mem bers in the House recall having heard that ruling in that manner, and I have checked with Members outside of this House who indeed indicated to me that they heard the ruling in that way. That is how it is printed in Hansard. However, the Votes and Proceed ings for that same day have a different concluding statement.

The Votes and Proce edings read, and I will read the same statement with the additional comment: "With respect, therefore, I must find that the Honourable Member's proposed motion to set aside the business of the House is out of order because the matter raised does not meet the required conditions, and because the format in which it is presented is contrary to the Rules of the House." The additional clause is, "and because the format in which it is presented is contrary to the Rules of the House." 894 I checked with several individ uals, as I indicated earlier, who listened to your ruling and not one of them remembers that statement having been made, yet it is contained in the official report of your ruling, which is indeed the Votes and Proceed ings.

I believe a strong prima facie case exists that the Votes and Proceedings do not accurately reflect your ruling. That is a breach of privilege as all Members of the House rely upon our official minutes of Votes and Proceed ings to accurately portray what actually occurred in this House on any given day. I move, therefore, seconded by the Member for Thompson (Mr .

Ashton), that WH EREAS there is serious discrepancy between the ruling of the Speaker as transcribed in Hansard and is written in the Votes and Proceed ings; and WHER EAS the written ruling in the Votes and Proceed ings adds a substantive issue to that ruling; and WH EREAS all Members must rely on the proceedings as identified in the official minutes of this House, which is the Votes and Proceed ings; and, WHERE AS any inaccurate wording in the Votes and Proceedings will restrict our ability as legislators to address issues in this Chamber; and WHE REAS any restriction of our ability to function as Members in this Chamber is a breach of the privileges of all Members of the House; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this matter be referred to the Standing Comm ittee of the Legislature on Privi leges and Ele ctions;- tha t is my official motion-and BE IT FUR TH ER RESOL VED th at the Standing Comm ittee on Privi leges and Elections be directed to report back to this Legislature as to (

a) how this inaccurate reporting of the proceedings of the House was allowed; and secondly, (

b) recommendations on how to avoid any occurrence of inaccurate reports in the future. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader. I will permit limited and strictly relevant debate. Hon. James McCrae (Government House leader): Mr. Speaker, I think, by the time I reach the end of my very brief comments, I will have suggested that you take this matter under advisement and bring the matter back before the House, and at that time offer myself and the Opposition House Leader (Mr .

Alcock) and others who may wish to get involved in the discussion an opportunity to speak to you before you make a decision about the motion that you have in your hand. The matter I think come s do wn to an al leged difference between the spoken record and the actual record as it appears in Votes and Proceedings, and I suggest that this is a matter that you should take under advisement, Sir, and come back to the House with. However, when we are dealing with the format of motions under our Rule 27, I have raised repeatedly in this Session the format used certainly by the New

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 Democratic Party and perhaps also, if my memory serves me correctly, by the Liberal Party in bringing forward motions of urgent and pressing importance under Rule 27. While we are talking about formats, we might even discuss the format of the motion that you have in your hand when we are dealing with the matter of privilege in the House. I would invite you, if you decide to accept my suggestion, when you do come back, to make a comment about the motion moved today.

I am not trying to restrict Honourable Mem bers in moving motions, but what we have again today is something that looks awfully like a Private Member's Resolution, and it seems to me all these "WHEREA Ses" and "BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVEDs" have no place, really, in motions of urgent and pressing importance under Rule 27, or, for that matter, a motion of privilege of the type raised today by the Honourable Member for Churchill (Mr . Cowan). So I have come to the end of my brief comments, Mr. Speaker, and I do suggest you take the matter under advisement. * (1 430) Mr.

Reg Alcock (Opposition House leader): I would simply like to say that a cursory examination of the Votes and Proceedings and Hansard for that day suggests that there is a discrepancy. I think a matter of privilege is an extremely serious thing and would echo the recommendation by the Government House Leader (Mr . McCrae) that you take this under advisement and report back to the House as quickly as possible. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank all Honourable Mem bers. Indeed , I will take this matter un der advisement and report back to the House. Mr.

Cowan: Perhaps some helpful advice if you are going to take it under advisement, if you will allow me the opportunity. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Churchill. Mr. Cowan: I believe, Mr. Speaker, that if one (lnterjections)-I heard some oh's and groans from the Mem bers oppo site- goes back and reviews the discussion of matters of privilege in this House, they will find there was an exchange of information, which is indeed what we are in this Chamber to do. I would just want to help you so that you are not misdirected by the Government House Leader (Mr .

McCrae) when he suggests that the format in which this motion for privilege of the House was presented. I refer you to Mr. Speaker Graham, his ruling in 19 80, on a motion which included- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Cowan: -"WHER EASes," which was found indeed to be in order. Mr. Speaker: Order , please; order, please. Thos e remarks are not relevant to this matter of privilege 895 which is a very serious issue and I have told the House that I will take it under advisement. I would like to thank all Honourable Members. IN TRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr.

Speaker: With us this afternoon in the Speaker's Gallery, I happen to notice Mr. Dave Blake, who is a former Member for Min nedosa, who took time out from his fishing, I would imagine. On behalf of all Honourable Members, we welcome you here this afternoon. ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. James McCrae (Government House leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr . Praznik), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair, and the House resolve itself into a Com mittee to consider of Ways and Means for raising of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

MOTION pre sented and carr ied and the Ho use resolved itself into a Com mittee to consider of Ways and Means for raising of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks (M r. Minenko) in the Cha ir. COMM ITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS INTERIM SUPPLY Mr. Chairman, Mark Minenko: I call the meeting of this committee to order to continue considering the resolution before the House.

The resolution reads: RESOLVED that towards making good the Supply granted to Her Ma je sty on acc ount of certain expenditures of the Public Service, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1989, the sum of $2,626,074,640, being 70 percent of the total amount voted as set out in The Appropriation Act (19 87), be granted out of the Consolidated Fund. The Honourable Member for Ellice. Ms. Avis Gray (EIIice): Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. I have some fairly important questions that I would like to ask the Mi nister of Health (Mr . Orchard). Could we ask ... . Mr.

Jerry Storie (Fiin Flon): Perhaps, while we await the arrival of the Minister of Health (Mr . Orchard), I am prepared to yield the floor to my friend from Ellice (Ms. Gray) when that Minister arrives, but I have a number of questions I would like to direct to the Minister of Finance (Mr . Man ness) in the interim, if that is all right. Mr. Chairman: Yes, I think the Member will agree with that. Mr. Storie: A couple of questions. I know that the Mi nister of Finance (Mr . Man ness) is responsible for the negotiations which are taking place currently with respect to the divestiture of Ma nfor. I was wondering

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 if the Min ister could direct Members on this side, and myself particularly , to any appropr iation , subappropriation in the Estimates where we might find any additional support staff that have been hired, either directly by departments, line departments in existing staff years, any additional staff years which have been added for that purpose, any contracts which would come out of departmental appropriations for the purpose of strengthening the negotiating team with respect to the sale of Manfor? Hon.

Clayton l\ll anness (Mi nister of Finance): There are no additional, or indeed any areas within the appropriation that would be in support of the divestiture of Manfor. Presently most of that activity is taking place under the existing structure in place. That is the Public Investment Corporation in Manitoba, and that of course, funding, as it is mandated presently, comes from Manfor itself. Mr.

Storie: Perhaps the Minister could indicate whether there has been anybody, or will be anybody taken on by Manf or, by PICM for this specific purpose, and whether there are plans to expand the negotiating team beyond that which existed prior to the change of Government on April 26? Mr. Manness: To be very candid, the major engineering firm or consulting firm that provided resource support to the exercise is still in place-Stodd art Consultants out of Vancouver. Right today and presently, as a matter of fact, we in Government are bringing in an additional resource to help us at this particular point in time. Mr.

Storie: Mr. Chairperson, I understood the Minister to say that they were bringing on additional personnel. Could the Minister indicate from which appropriation, which Crown corporation those additional staff would receive remuneration? Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, at this time I believe I will dir ect PICM to provide for the remuneration necessary in the same manner in which indeed it draws its support from Manfor. Mr. Storie: Mr.

Chairperson, I am wondering whether the Minister is at liberty at this point to identify the person or persons who would be hired for this task and whether he could indicate to this House what particular expertise they may have which would assist in the negotiations process. Mr. Manness: Mr. Chairman, I cannot disclose the name of the person or persons who will be helping us at this point.

Certainly the expertise that they bring within this area is multi-facetted in a sense that it will provide us with a much better understanding with respect to one of the proposals, one of the ones that has components of it that I do not believe that we are sufficiently well prepared to address. So I am seeking some outside advice in how to put the best evaluation towards those particular components of that proposal. * (14 40) Ms. Gray: Mr . Ch airp ers on, I have a nu mb er of questions for the Minister of Health (Mr .

Orchard) and 896 it relates to the communicable disease control and the dollars that this department has seen fit to put into communic able di sease educa tion, including AIDS education. We are certainly pleased to hear that there are some initiatives which are coming forth regarding the whole area of communic able disease control which, !rank ly, it is unfortunate that it has taken such a fatal disease such as AIDS to make Government recognize the actual impor tance of preve ntion in the whole area of communicable disease.

Certainly people who have worked in that particular field in the past will recognize the importance of teaching families, teaching school children, teaching the gene ral public about the importance of the prevention of communicable disease and about health promotion. The Honourable Minister of Health (Mr . Orchard) has indicated that there are going to be some substantial dollars going into the area of AIDS education which was indicated by the Throne Speech, and we now have the Main Estimates in front of us for the Department of Health.

Would the Minister please elaborate for us how those extra dollars are going to be spent? Are there a number of dollars for SYs that have been set aside for this? Are there pilot projects that are going to be conducted? Are some of those dollars in advertising and public educati on-i f he could explain to this House more of a breakdown of how those dollars are going to be spent. Hon. Donald Orchard (Mi nister of Health): Mr. Chairman, how be I make an offer to my honourable friend that she cannot refuse? Ms. Gray: I have refused them before. Mr.

Orchard: In terms of details as to extra SYs and dedication of staff resources, etc., etc., I really believe that we can appropriately discuss those issues in Estimates. What is very appropriate right now is a broader, philosophical discussion, if you will, as to the direction one ought to take if one is truly believing in prevention as being one of the best-spent dollars in terms of keeping our population well, and away from the more formal methods of intervention treatment. I would welcome that broader debate this afternoon.

Let me begin by saying that probably there have been fewer more cost-effective methods of saving actual health care dollars than, for instance, the immuni zation program and immunization education, as it has become part of the mainstream, if you will, of health delivery in the free world, and indeed throughout the world. The whole idea, the whole concept of immuni zation has been something that actually has been a part of my life since-the first immunization I can recall having, of course, is the immunization against poliomyelitis when I was in Grade 2.

That discovery of an economic immu nization program probably has saved more dollars than probably any other single immu nization that has been part of daily medicine. Let me share with my honourable friend some more recent concerns, and I seek her wise counsel this

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 afternoon from the broader, philosophical standpoint. I believe that from time to time we have been possibly exuberant in terms of our application of strict rules in terms of immu nization requirements, and with any process like imm unization, designed for the prevention of disease, there are a very, very small but unfortunate minority of circumstances wherein the immuni zation itself can cause some significant problems.

The de cision in the past has been to balanc e, presumably, the community good against an individual's concern or an individual's desire that they not run the risk of a potential adverse reaction to an immu nization.

That is a very pointed debate, because on the one hand you have a family who very much is concerned about the potential side effects of an immun ization inoculation, and on the other hand you have public health officials, all of whom you pay reasonable salaries to provide you with the best expertise and opinion that is available, presumabl y, and you operate on that advice and implement immunization programs. I want to give you one example of where I thought sometimes the advice was a little exuberant.

I believe the time was approximately a year-and-a-half ago and red measles had become a mini-epidemic, if you will. We had a number of cases. In going through the immuni zation records, immuni zation for red measles has to occur on the first birthda y. We had arbitrarily set , for an admission to scho ol, for childr en, a requirement that if the immunization had not been done at exactly the one year birthdate that the child would have to be reimmunized.

That means that if the parent had brought their child in two or three or four days prior to their birth day, that child had to be reimmun ized or else that child could not go to school. I found that to be a par ticularly puzzling application of public health policy because the majority of the children, if not all of the children, because of the edict, who were at school were immuni zed and hence protected and could not contract the disease; yet we were refusing entry by the criterion of a two-or three day window that was inadvertently missed by the parent and the child.

We were refusing that child entry to school until they were reimmunized. That focused on the whole issue of immuni zation reaction, etc., etc. in a degree that had not been opportune or been there in the past. I happened, in that case, to have agreed with the parents who made the very case that I just made now that of what possible danger is there?

Because, first and foremost, there was no apparent evidence that having the immuni zation two or three or four or five days prior to the first birthday meant that child was not in an immune circumstance with his body defence systems, so that what we were doing was erring very much on the side of caution and I think that we overjudged or overreacted in that circumstance. Ho wever, the penalty was very, very strong- very severe-and if the parent did not take the child in for reimmunization, the child was denied access to school, and that school would have been attended by children who were fully immuni zed.

I think that we have to continue with our immu nization programs in the province because they have probably 897 been the greatest protector of health that has been developed in recent years and, in effect, are the ideal preventative measure, but I think there needs to be, from time to time, a more realistic or commo n-sense approach to that and I would welcome my honourable friend's comments. * (14 50) Ms.

Gray: In light of what the Mini ster has said, I would certainly be interested in knowing if he has in fact given new directives to the director of Communicable Disease Control regarding what the procedure should be should such an unfortunate incident such as an outbreak of red measles actually occur again in Winnipeg. I would also be interested in knowing from the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard): Only now has there been a be ginning of having the health records, of over which there are 50,000 at least in Winnipeg, a beginning of the health records to be computerized.

If we had an outbreak of red measles in the up-coming months, I mu st say that few of the health rec ords are computerized, the rest are all manual, kept in filing cabinets which are not locked, which may be something that the Minister of Health would care to look into so they are of access to anyone who happens to walk into the office. So I have concerns, no w th at we are tal king specifically about immunization, as the Min ister has raised. Has he given different directives to Dr. Fast, to the director of Communicable Disease?

If there was an outbr eak of red me asles or some other communicable disease, what steps would be in place so that in fact we would be much better able to deal with that outbreak as opposed to what happened last time when there was a fair amount of confusion as to how that was going to be handled? Compounded with that problem, as the Min ister of Health (Mr. Orchard) is probably aware, if there was an outbreak, we have three regions in the City of Winnipeg which are autonomous.

We would hope that there would have to be a lot of coordination because there are different medical officers of health in each region; that there certainly would have to be a lot of coordination of those three regions as to how the whole issue of a communicable disease outbreak would be dealt with. I would welcome the Min ister of Health's comments on that, and then I would like to pursue the more broader aspect of Communicable Disease and Health Promotion. Mr. Orchard: The simple answer to my honourable friend's question is that no directive has gone out to Dr. Fast over communicable diseases.

That is because no request for action similar to the circumsta nces I outlined has come to my office, but I will tell you in generic terms what would be required should such a request come forward and a similar recommendation come forward. I would be seeking justification and answers to the very questions that I have just laid on the record. If

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 those answers could not be given in a reasoned fashion, and assurances given that the child would be less properly served by following the former direction, then I would certainly have no hesitation in turning back a recommendation to proceed as they had in the past. As my ho no urable friend well kn ows . every circumstance of a communicable disease outbreak is different. No two circu mstances are identical.

In that particular one that I laid out, I believe that, in retrospect, we probably overreacted as Government, and it would not be my tendency, given similar circums tances, to react in the same way. In terms of the computerization of immuni zation records, yes, that is ongoing. That is a process which ought to be able to give to public health officials, to school officials the information they require in the event of an outbreak of communicable diseases, whatever they may well be, to assure that student safety is in place not only personally but collectively.

Right now the system -no qu estion -is some what archaic. However, I believe, and I will stand corrected if I am proven wrong, but at the time of the red measles breakout, the onus was on the parent to send with the child proof of immuni zation, something that all parents have as part of their family records. If in the event the parent had inadvertently misplaced that record of immu nization, it was avai lable through the Public Health Office in the area concerned.

I know of that from some personal experience because we had misplaced one of our child's immuni zation record and we were able to have it very quickly and very efficiently replaced. Even though it was not computerized, the filing system allowed replacement of that and there was no difficulty. Ms. Gray: Let us go back to talkin g ab out Communicable Disease Control and the new dollars.

I really would appreciate some elaboration from the Minister as to the numb er of components of the Health Department where conceivably dollars and resources, whether it is staff years or specific dollars for resources, in advertising could be injected into for communicable disease and AIDS education. If the Mini ster does not have exact dollars attached to each of the various components, or exact SYs, could he at least give us some indication here in the House today as to where the emphasis, where the SYs will be for increasing this commun icable disease education?

Are all the resou rces going to be going to the Communicable Disease Control directorate? Have there been some provisions made for an increase in staff years at the regional operations level? We heard in the House today that the in-servicing is actively going on for teachers through the Department of Education, and the Minister of that department indicated as well that that in-servicing was being done by a public health staff.

Given that this has been seen as a priority, this particular in-servicing in education, have there been extra resources which have been given to public health nurses in regional operations to ensure that, in fact, they will be able to do a good job and actually provide the in-servicing to teachers across Manitoba? 898 Mr. Orchard: lt is my understanding that the in servicing program that is under way now is similar in many respects with the exception being of updating of current information that has gone on in the past using the same resource expertise from communicable diseases as well as regional staff. Ms.

Gray: Could the Min ister tell us, given that the public health nursing staff have been designated in regions to provide this education not only to teachers but to all other professionals in the health care field, to professionals in community services who work in those offices and to the direct service workers-and I am referring specifically to orderlies, home care attendants and home support workers-public health nurses have specifically been designated to provide this in-service in education-could the Min ister tell us how this is going to be accomplished if in fact no new resources will be given to regional operations for public health nurses for this express purpose?

Mr. Orchard: I do not necessarily follow the logic of my honourable friend's question. Ms. Gray: My question is, No. 1, have new resources, i.e., staff years, been specifically allocated to regional operations for the purpose of doing communicable disease education which has been given a priority with this particular Government? My question is how are these teachers, how are all di rect service workers, how are other health professionals going to be in-serviced if there are no new SYs who have been designa ted to reg iona l operations?

My question is have they been designated, or are all the new resources going to the directorate level, the Communicable Disease Directorate? Mr.

Orchard: I would highly recommend that that detail can be provided when we reach the line in Estimates which discusses Communicable Disease Control, and that will not even provide the full answer because we have to then get into Regional Services wherein the majority of the delivery staff, if you will, are paid, and that is the line for appropriate discussion. * (1 500) I simply indicate to my honourable friend that the communicable disease program is one which has taken an expanded role over the last couple years-expanded not because necessarily of communicable diseases, but because of STDs which are a very much narrower area of expertise rather than the communicable disease control.

To my knowledge, the ability of staff, public health nurses, etc., to provide information to those teacher groups, those parent groups in terms of up-to-date information on communicable diseases. per se, is rather -1 do not like to use "routine" as the words an ongoing program. However, there are changes which resources have been dedicated to recognize. in terms of STDs, particularly with AIDS, but also to another extent with chlamydia, because chlamydia has only, as

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 my honourable friend nods her knowledgeable head, recently been made a reportable disease. I might indicate to my honourable friend that probably one of the first press conferences I had as chief critic for Health was to urge the then Minister of Health to make Ch lamydia a reportable dis ease un der The Reportable Diseases Act, and some year-and-a-half later that was done.

Now, although STDs in general have been at least levelling off and perchance declining, with Chlamydia being a newly reportable disease, the incidence and tracing requirements and the education requirements there are substantially highe r.

That same criterion, of course, applies to AIDS, wherein we are in an ongoing education program because so many factors in terms of AIDS are changing, almost on a monthly basis, although I do have to admit that the level of new information appears to be cooling off slightly from what it was, say, one year ago, where you could almost on a monthly basis achieve new information on AIDS and how it was affecting the population. So that resource dedication is more in the area of the STDs rather than communicable diseases. Ms.

Gray: In regard to Commun icable Disease Control and the allocation of resources, and I bring this point up now rather than in Estimates because, of course, my prime purpose in raising these questions is to ensure that resources are allocated most appropriately, not to just necessarily ask questions in Estimates to see what kind of response-! am suggesting to the Min ister of Health (Mr .

Orchard) that he may want to talk to his people in Communicable Disease ControL There has been some discussion of an SY in Communicable Disease Control being allocated for the purpo se of providing education to the public in Communicable Disease ControL The question that has been raised is what type of professional do we hire who can provide the best job? Should we be hiring a public health nurse with a Master's degree to provide the education, or should we be hiring more physicians?

I would ask that the Mini ster of Health check into that area to see whether we can be getting two public health nurses with a Master's degree for the price of one physician, and who could be doing a better job of the communicable disease education to the public. We certainly have a director of Communicable Disease who is a very well qualified physician and certainly would be there to provide the guidance. So I ask the Min ister that he possibly check into that. I have only a couple more questions along the line of health, a different area. I was wondering if the Minister of Health (Mr .

Orchard) would be prepared to table in this Ho use the review th at was do ne by Price Waterhouse on the Home Care Program this past year, and would he, as well, be prepared to table in this Ho us e the internal review th at was do ne by the Department of Health staff some two years ago. Mr. Orchard: Mr.

Chairman, it is my intention to table the Price Waterhouse review as we approach Health Estimates so we can have a more informed debate, but I simply have to ask my honourable friend to be 899 somewhat more specific about the internal review within the department on continuing care because, unless I have an author or some other mor e def ini tive benchmark, I cannot indicate whether that review has been brought to my attention. Ms.

Gray: Actually, if you speak to your Deputy Minister, I am sure that he will be able to tell you about the internal review that was undertaken about two years ago which involved an extensive amount of staff time within the Department of Health. My understanding is that review was never circulated or in fact it was shelved with the previous administration. I am asking the Mini ster-if he is not aware of it, then he may want to be made aware of it-if in fact he would consider tabling it in this House. Another question that I have for the Mi nister of Health (Mr.

Orchard), I am wondering if the Mini ster of Health has any concerns regarding the Free Trade Agreement and how it may impact on our health care in this province. Mr. Orchard: I have attempted to familiarize myself to the best degree possible with the implications of the Free Trade Agr eement. I have to ind icate to my honourable friend that my analysis to date, and some of the analysis that has been made available to me, does not indicate to me any major impact in terms of the Free Trade Agreement on the method by which we deliver health care in the Province of Manitoba and indeed Canada.

I have to simply indicate to my honourable friend that I believe the biggest impact that the Free Trade Agreement will have on our health care system is in its ability to provide to Canadians, and to Manitobans, in parti cular , an opportunity for growth in th eir businesses, growth in the economy, since we are here to spend tax dollars to provide health care services, to provide other social programs, to build highways, etc. * (1 51 0) I do not think I need to remind anybody in this House that if your sources of tax dollars do not grow, neither can your expenditures, and that lesson was learned even by the socialists over the last six years, wherein they went through their prolific of spending of $500 mi llion-per-year deficits with the accom panyi ng skyrocketing of interest payments and the denial that Manitobans have needed services, because monies were leaving this province to pay investors in Zurich, Tokyo, Bonn, New York, all around the world, to the tune of over $570 million per year.

I remind my honourable friend, because I know she is very astute and wishes to follow the development and the legacy that increasing debt causes to provincial administrations, and I know that her seatmate beside her will reaffirm this. In 1981, in the last Budget of the then Progressive Conservative administration, the entire interest paid by the taxpayers of Manitoba was $9 1 million, I believe. I stand to be corrected, give or take a million or two. What is that old saying, "What is a

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 million?" Well, now we are into "What is a hundr ed million?" when it comes to terms of interest payments. That $90 million of interest payments was as a result of-what was it?-in 1981, as a result of 11 2 years of Governme nt-Go vernment of all politic al stripes, through two World Wars-that was the total interest paid by the people of Manitoba to service accumulated debt of 11 2 years of Government. I am going to ask my honour able friend, the Finance Minister (Mr. Manness), for just a little bit of clarification from his seat.

When I go to Public Debt Statutory and I find the figure of $483 million, does that include Manitoba Properties Inc.? Mr. Manness: No, it does not. Mr. Orchard: Okay. I will just go to Government Services then while there is time. For that almost $62 million in Government Services to pay for Manitoba Properties Inc., so a quick figure and a quick addition of those two lines get you up to, very quickly, $545 million of interest costs per year that we pay this year.

And that is with a dollar which has increased over the last four years th at we have had rea soned the Government in Ottawa, that is with interest rates that have come down from an all-time high with reason to Government in Ottawa-the very same Government that Members opposite, from both political Parties, constantly berate for issues which are-certainly they have the public eye, the public profile, the scandals, etc. etc., but my honourable friends in the Opposition admits the global picture of the value of four years of Progress Conservative financial management under Prime Min ister Mulr oney and Finance Minister Michael Wilson.

If we had continued upon the Liberal legacy in Ottawa of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, an individual who, incidentally, now that I am on my feet, is against Meech Lake, as all Members of the Liberal Party in this Chamber are against Meech Lake, and if one needs to find a reason to be in favour of Meech Lake, surely it is because Pierre Elliott Trudeau is against it.

For one reason alone, the man who centralized this country in Ottawa, the man who drove the deficit nationally through the roof with related interest payments, the man who single handed ly, with Marc Lalonde and a couple of other cohorts, destroyed the Alberta energy economy, is against Meech Lake because it decentralizes power in Ottawa. We will not get into Meech Lake right now because Meech Lake no doubt has some implication on health care as well, if my honourable friends in the Liberal Party carry it far enough. Let me continue with my remarks.

Today we pay $545 million of interests. it was $90 million in 198 1. Where do my honourable friends in the Liberal Opposition expect to get the resource to even meet those interest costs, let alone reduce them? Paying the interest costs is one thing, but paying the accumulated debt upon which interest is paid is yet another matter, because for every dollar you remove of interest payment, you must repay $10 in borrowed 900 capital. That means, to get our interest payment down to the $90 million that it was in 1981, we have to repay let me do a quick calculation-455 by 10-$4.5 billion.

Where does that resource come from? Where does that resource come from to even meet the interest payments, let alone pay back the debt? Do you know where it comes from? lt comes from every living, breathing Manitoban who pays taxes. And all Ma nitobans pay taxes, whether empl oyed or not, because they all pay sales tax, they all pay other taxes of which we get a share.

So, my honourable friends, when they oppose free trade, are opposing one of the largest single opportunities presented to this province and to the people of Canada to extract ourselves from the morass of deficit financing, the interest payments on which deny social services.

For that $545 million that will leave this province for interest payment this year, not one mile of highway is reconstructed; not one hospital bed is kept open; not one Manitoban can access additional home care; not one university student will have a greater opportunity for education; not one homeowner will have reduced property taxes-a portion of which pays for the education system-as long as that money leaves this province.

So th e greatest single opportunity we have economically in this province and in this country now is in freeing up that last 20 percent of trade with the United States under the Free Trade Agreement over a phased-in period of time to protect those industries that are most vulnerable to the Free Trade Agreement. And if there is one opportunity that we have in this province, it is with the Free Trade Agreement, because we are an exporting province.

Versatile does not live on sales of farm machinery in Manitoba. lt has substantial sales in the United States as does our every single major industry in Manitob � that employs Manitobans who end up paying the taxes we need to provide the services for the people of Manitoba.

I cannot put it in any better terms than the terms that were given to us-and I will only paraphrase them because I cannot approach them with the eloquence of this indi vidual as I sat at th e First Ministers' Conference in Saskatoon some two weeks ago. * (1 520) We had the Premier of Ontario greatly decrying the Free Trade Agreem ent, which, from his polit ical perspective, is a good thing to do.

After all, why would you not, as Premier of Ontario, having Auto Pact which significantly has boosted your economy, which is the ultimate in the Free Trade Agreement with the United States, when you have that in your hip pocket and it is creating jobs, investment, employment and wealth in your province, why would you not be like the dog in the manger and say we do not want anything else; we do not want anybody else to have an opportunity to enhance their stature in trade with the United States the jobs, the investment and the wealth in their provinc� when we have it aiL But there was another Premier there who I thought brought the whole issue right to a nutshell in about

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 three sentences. lt was Premier Robert Bou rassa from the Province of Quebec. He said, in effect, that what has happened to our country over the last several decades is that we have allowed deficits on a national and provincial level to escalate. As a result of the escalation of deficits, we now find ourselves dedicating more of a scarce tax resource to the repayment of interest on that accu mulated deficit, and he said that has impacted upon our competitive position on the international market.

He said that if anything will ruin us as a nation, it is lack of competitiveness on the international market. He welcomed the Free Trade Agreement as a province who has major trade associations with the United States and industries which are affected adversely by the Free Trade Agreement because not all industries benefit from it. The net benefit is there for Canada and for Manitoba and for Quebec. He said that without the Free Trade Agreement, we continue along our ways of inefficient production and inefficient planning.

He said we cannot do that in a country of 25 million people, we have to look outside, and the Free Trade Agreement does that for us. He welcomed it as an opportunity for the people of Quebec and the businessmen of Quebec and the businesswomen of Quebec to expand their horizons, to seek out markets in the United States and to follow through on the development of those markets with the bottom line being that Que becers will find new jobs and new wealth. I cannot say it any better than that. I have taken many more words to say it than what he did at the First Min isters' Conference.

I simply offer a global observation to my honourable friend from Ellice (Ms. Gray); that we can continue on and we can attempt to fight the Free Trade Agreement as they are doing, not knowing really why they want to fight it, not having a better proposal, standing up on one hand saying, we do not like the Free Trade Agreement but we are free traders and we are in favour of free trade. There is that old saying that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. If you do not like this particular agreement, where is your agreement that is better?

John Turner had one at one time, as Leader of the Liberal Party, back about 15 years ago when he was a little more sane in his reasoning and was not driven by some of the left-wing idealogues in his caucus right now. But now, John Turner has changed his colours. He says he is against this Free Trade Agreement but not against freer trade. Make up your mind. If you do not like this agreement, say what is one that is better. But under the analysis that I have seen of the Free Trade Agre ement, Man itoba is a benefactor as a province. There will be new jobs in Manitoba.

There will be strengthened industrial opportunities in Manitoba for our resource industries and for agriculture. That, Mr. Chairman, means jobs. When you have jobs, you have tax resource to pay for Health Care. So the bottom line is, free trade means better Health Care. Mr. Laurie Evans (F ort Garry): I was wondering whether I could ask a question or two of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr . Findlay). 901 Yesterday, the Member for Lakeside (Mr . Enns) asked a couple of questions of the Minister regarding the Greenfeed Program and the Livestock Assistance Program.

If I understood the Min ister's response, I believe those two programs essentially utilized the $18.3 million that has been identified for the Emergency Drought Relief Program. Recently, there has been several publications that have come out of the Minister's department regarding such things as trash cover, reduced tillage and so on. Certainly, I agree with these proposals. But these are not necessarily new proposals, they are the type of recommendations that have been made for many years. I think we have seen in the past year or two considerable soil erosion despite the fact that these proposals were made.

I am a little concerned that looking through the Budget, I do not see that the Minister has a great deal of discretionary funding available to him that might assist municipalities or individual farmers to utilize these proposals if they are in fact in a tight situation as far as cash flow is concerned.

I am wondering if the Member has any mechanism at his dispo sal that could assist, because I would regard this as a pretty important investment to try and ensure that we do not run into major erosion problems in the spring of 19 89 and I think the susceptibility or the vulnerability is greater than it has been in the past because many of the areas that have suffered from drought have very limited soil cover at the present time. There has been some salvaging of crops earlier on so that there are a lot of areas that are essentially in fallow form even though they were planted in the spring of 1988.

We have seen such things as the necessity of clearing drainage ditches, roadside ditches and other things which are attributable to the erosion that took place in previous years even though we did not visualize it as a major problem in some of those years, compared with what I would regard as the vulnerability that exists this year. Can the Minister give us any information as to any programs or plans that are afoot that might make greater utilization or allow farmers to utilize these promotions more than they have in previous years? Hon.

Glen Findlay (Mini ster of Agriculture): I would like to just add ress the Member's comments there. Really what we are doing there is putting information out so producers are made aware again of the obvious, that soil erosion can occur when we have small coverage on the land and the barren land is subject then to significant winds that reoccur this fall or next spring. For the Member's benefit, all I can say is that we are going to put increased emphasis on the education and the extension side to make farmers more aware of the conseque nces of excessive tillage and leaving the land bare.

Some farmers are naturally going to do tillage now that may look like they should not have done it but their idea is to work it early in the year and get a growth on that land and leave that growth on over winter. (Mr . Deputy Chairman, Harold Gilleshammer, in the Chair.)

Tuesda� August 30, 1988 I guess there is also another problem that farmers face and they have got to balance the pros and cons. As you drive across the country you see significant weed problems in the stubble fields that we have this fall; very significant weed problems, kochia, thistles, a variety of other broadleaf weeds and many producers are going to be forced to do some tillage particularly for the perennials to try to reduce the impact of weeds next year.

I can tell the Member that we are going to be putting increased emphasis on weed districts in the coming year or years because we have to be able to have the resource people out there to deal with these problems and we have a balancing act right now whether we should till and expose the land to erosion or not till and leave the weeds to grow. Which is the worst? With a good two months left in this season, I think the farmers have got some difficult choices and are hopefully working with staff to make the right decision for their particular kind of soil type.

I always think that the majority of farmers are very conservation conscious and will, in the long term, make many of the right decisions. We put this kind of information out to remind them as much as we can and are asking staff, ag reps and other extension staff to keep on top of the fact that there is a serious problem out there, the two problems, and try to give farmers the right advice on the individual situations. Mr. Evans: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Minister's response on that.

The only comment I would make is that when you are looking at tillage for the control of perennial weeds, I think what you are faced with is many producers have the equipment and the machinery to go out and do the tillage, where in actual fact they may be better off to have utilized herbicide, a chemical control.

I would ask the Min ister, do the mun icipalities have any flexibility at their disposal where they could be of assistance in the procurement of these chemicals and make them available to those growers who would utilize them at a cost price or on the basis of bulk purchasing and maybe be in a better position than the individual producer is to utilize that type of a change in management? * (15 30) Mr. Findlay: I guess the short answer is, no, the mun icipalities are not being able to play a role in terms of supplying chemicals at lower cost .

The one chemical that might be most appropriate to use is Roundup for particularly twitch grass and any perennial weed, really. I would just remind the Member that there is going to be an annou ncement on September 1 for a public meeting for the UMA Engi neering Report on the feasibility of producing glyphosate in the Province of Manitoba and producing it as a generic. That report is going to be made public and a number of farm organizations and interested individuals have been invited to that meeting, put on by my department staff, in the Norquay Building two days from now.

There is some interesting information obtained from that study, and hopefully when Roundup comes off 902 patent in, I think it is November of 1990, not too far down the road, that we are able to get a lower cost material of the Roundup nature that will allow producers to use it effectively to control weeds without having to increase the amount of tillage. lt will certainly facilitate the zero tillage or minimum tillage concept, which is a conserva tion ob jective for many of the more vulnerable soils in the Province of Manitoba.

I guess the probable disappoint ment is going to be that Roundup will never be as low priced as some people have predicted, like $6 an acre. lt is never going to be that cheap, but surely it will be a lot cheaper than $18 an acre and $30 an acre which it use to be. Mr. Evans: I wonder whether the Minister could give us sort of a brief scenario in terms of the effectiveness of the emergency water services that were provided in the droug ht-stricken area this year, because going through the Estimates, I see that there is relatively little change as far as the Water Services Board is concerned.

I appreciate that you are looking at not only the Water Services Board, but also The Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act contributes significantly to that.

Many of the water de velopments are also, thr ough the indi vidu al municipalities, in terms of the financing through the mill rate and so on, but without getting into an extremely long dialogue on this, I am just wondering whether the Min ister is satisfied that the emergency measures for water services were effective and, in fact, whether there is good movement in terms of droughtproofing should a drought of this magnitude come upon us again in the next year or two.

Or are we going to be looking at the same thing where the avai lability of water to livestock producers and others and small communities, in particular, is a major problem again or is this being rapidly rectified? Mr. Findlay: Certain ly, I will give the Member a brief accounting of what I understand is going on. We can maybe get into a little more discussion when we are in Estimates on this particular topic. All requests for droughtproofing or water really go through the Water Services Board.

Any discussions I have had with the Water Services Board staff in the past couple of months would indicate that all the requests coming to them have been met by the board, in terms of pumping, drilling, finding water, hauling water, that they believe that they have met the demands that have come forward to this point in time. Certainly, the southwestern part of the province is in a serious short situation, are seriously short of water right now for this fall and winter.

Really, the only solution down there is a major rain, like a three-or four-inch rain to collect water into dugouts, because they are very low going into the winter. Many livestock producers depend on dugouts as a source of water. Some of the shallow wells down there have gone dry too. But there has been an active program of community well drilling, where municipalities apply to the Water Services Board for a community well, which is a major well, it is a deep well. lt is put in with the large shaft. In some cases they put in two shafts side by side in case the first one breaks down.

That program, we promoted it aggressively this spring by writing to the

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 mun icipalities and telling them if you believe your area, your municipality is short of water or may be short of water, put in an application for a communi ty well. A numb er of them have been drilled over the last numb er of years and a significant numb er were drilled this summer. I do not know the exact numb er to tell the Mem ber. A lot of pumping has gone on.

The last heard, 250 applic ations were pumping water to dugo uts, but in the southwest part of the province, a lot of them have over five miles to have to pump water and that becomes very expensive and producers are really not aggressively reques ting pumping in that area right now because I believe it may be a little bit on the expensive side. We are looking at a num ber of other projects in areas that are chronically short of water to droughtproof them for the future, not only the farm sites but some of the villages.

This involves putting in a well where there is a good supply of water and then piping it to the communiti es involved. lt is a very expensive project. Items like that are being looked at and discussed and money being appropriated where possible. lt requi res involvement of the municipalities in terms of financial cont ributions and acceptance of the idea that we are going to do that kind of proposal, but to the best of my knowledge, the immed iate needs of water for farm and small communi ties has been met by the Water Services Board in conjunction with PFRA for this year. Mr.

Evans: Moving on to a different area here -it relates to the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation, and of course there has been a sizeable increase in the amount of money allocated to the doubtful debts in discussing this with the Min ister earlier, I got the impression that part of this was at least a change in accou nting. but I would like to ask the Min ister whether he anticipates that this level of funding is in fact going to be required because of the bad debts that we are facing with MACC or is this not a major departure from what has occurred in recent past years? Mr.

Findlay: No, there is a change in accounting for doubtful accounts requested by the Department of Finance. If the Mem ber looks on page 12, under item 3. $11. 271 million as allowance for doubtful accounts, if we were using the same accounting practice a year ago, the figu re on the left had side wou ld be approximately $10 .5 million. That would be comparing apples and apples. The $2.5 million is the old accounting procedure. The one on the right is a new accounting procedure. I really should not say any more than that now. When we get into Estimates.

I will give the Mem ber a sheet that details all the mechanisms of making the cal cu lations. lt is a very compli cated method of accounting, but the new accounting practice keeps the corporation totally current with possible write-offs that they may have to encounter in the coming year. Right now, we are in a down cycle in terms of bad accounts. The price of grain is now up. Some parts of the province have had reasonable crop, other parts have had poor. If we can get a reasonable crop in '89 over all the prov ince, this problem of do ub tful accounts will disappear very quick ly.

Hopeful ly, that happens in '89. 903 Mr. Deputy Chairman: Is it the will of the committee to adopt the resolution? Do you wish to have it read? RESOLVED that towards making good the Supply granted to Her Ma jesty on acc ount of certain expenditures of the Public Service, for the fiscal year ending th e 31s t da y of Ma rch 19 89, the sum of $2,626,074,640, being 70 percent of the total amount voted as set out in The Appropriation Act (1 987), be granted out of the Consolidated Fund. (Agreed) Call in the Speaker. IN SESSION COMMITTEE REPORT Mr.

Harold Gilleshammer (Deputy Chairman of the Commit tee of the Whole House): The Commi ttee of Ways and Means has considered certain resolutions, directs me to report progress, and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Mem ber for Swan River (Mr. Burrell), that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. *

(1540) INTRODUCTION OF BILLS Hon. Cl ayton Manness (Min ister of Finance) intro duced, by leave, Bill No. 7, The Inter im Appropriation Act, 1988, and be ordered for second reading immedia tely. SECOND READING Bill NO. 7-THE INTERIM APPROPRIATION ACT , 1988 Hon. Clay ton Manness (M inis ter of Finance) presented, by leave, Bill No. 7, The Interim Appropriation Act. 1988, for second read ing. MOTION presented. Mr.

Manness: Bill 7, which is being distributed to Membe rs at this point, The Interim Appropriation Act, 19 88, is req uired to provide interim spend ing, commitment and borrowing authority for the 1988-89 fiscal year, retroactive to April 1, pending approval of The Appropriation Act, 1988.

The amount of spending authority requested is $2,626,074,640, being 70 percent of the total sums voted, excluding statutory items, as set forth in The Appropriation Act, 1987, as follows: for a total, general statutory appropriations, $466,32 5, 100, for total sums voted of $3,751 ,535,200, adding to a total Main Estimate of Expenditure in the 1987 year of $4,21 7,860,300.00. The Interim Supply calculation is 70 percent of the $3,75 1,535,200 sums voted, which equals the amount that we have discussed over the last num ber of hours, $2.626,074 billion.

This amount is estimated to last approximately until late Novem ber, 1988.

Tuesday, August 30, 1988 The amount of future commitment authori ty included in this Interim Supply Bill is $245 million, being 70 percent of the total amount autho rized for futur e commitments, as set out in The Appr opriation Act, 1987. The total 1988-89 forward commitment authority to be included in the Main Supply Bill will be $300 million, as compared to $350 million provided for in 1987-88. A borrowing authority clause has again been included in the Interim Supply Bill for 1988-89. Bill 7 will provide the Government with borrowing authority of $300 million.

Bill 7 is required to provide interim spending, commitment and borrowing authori ty effective April 1, to ensure the continued operation of Government. This Bill replaces spending authority previously provided by way of Special Warrants for Government operations. To facilitate the Budget Debate, I would like to request the cooperation of Opposition in passing Bill 7 through all phases of consideration. I should reword that, Mr. Speaker.

To coordinate the fact that the existing Warrant that is now in place comes due and runs its course as of the end of this month, I would request that Mem bers in the Opposition benches would give speedy passage to the Interim Supply Bill No. 7 before tomorrow, before the end of the business day tomorrow. When Bill 7 reaches the Commi ttee Stage, I will provide Memb ers with a section-by-section explanation. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. QUESTION put, MOTION carried. Mr. Manness: I move, seconded by the Mini ster of Health (Mr. Orchard), that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Cha ir, and the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider and report of Bill No. 7, The Interim Appropriation Act, 1988. MOTION presented and carried and the Ho us e resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider and report of Bill No. 7, The Interim Appropriation Act, 1988; Loi de 1988 Portant Affectation Anticipee de Credits for third reading. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT STAGE BILL NO. 7-THE INTERIM APPROPR IATION ACT, 1988 Mr. Deputy Ch airman, Harold Gil leshammer: Commi ttee, come to order to consider Bill No. 7, The Interim Appropriation Act, 1988.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Min ister of Finance): I will just take a few minutes to give Members some greater depth with respect to the Bill that they have just had an opportunity to peruse over the last few moments. * (15 50) Bill No. 7, The Interim Appropriation Act, 1988, is required to provide interim spending commitment and borrowing autho rity for the '88-89 fiscal year, retroactive to April 1, pending approval of The Appropriation Act, 1988. 904 The amount of interim supply, or spending auth ority, requested in

Section 2 of Bill No. 7 is $2. 626074640 billion, or 70 percent of the sums voted, as set forth in The Appropriation Act of 1987. This amount is expected to last until late November

Section 3( 1) Commitments for future years: Includes $245 million, compared to $210 million provided by The Interim Appropriation Act 1987, the second Act, reflecting the anticipated later date of Royal Assent for The Appropriation Act 1988. Expenditures for these commitments cannot be made in the '88-89 fiscal year unless additional spending authority is provided.

Section 3(2) Voting of funds in subsequent years: Mr. Chairman, this

Section provides that the estimated amount of expenditures which are committed shall be included in the Estimates of the fiscal year in which the actual expenditures are expected to be made.

Section 4 Limitation on expenditure for items: This

Section is self-explanatory and permits expenditures up to the full amount of each individual item to be voted in the Main Estimates, even though total expenditures autho rized by Bill No. 7 are only a portion of '88-89 requirements.

Section 5 Effective passing of main appropriations: This

Section stipulates that once the main appropriation Act is passed, any funds expended or commi tted under the autho rity of this interim Act will be deemed to have been made under the authority of the main Act.

Section 6( 1) Transfer of certain funds: This

Section allows for the transfer to the appropriate departments of all money to be autho rized for expenditure under the Canada-Manitoba Enabling Vote.

Section 6(2) Adjustments in Main Estimates: This

Section requ ires that any transfers of money made under Su bsection 1 will be adjusted if necessary in accordance with transfer provisions included in the main or any supplementary appropriation Acts.

Section 7 Expenditure in anticipation of recoveries: This

Section provides that departments, in order to render services or provide materials, suppli es or pro perty to other de partments tha t are cost recoverable, may make the required expenditures in anticipation of recovering the cost from the other departments.

Section 8(1) Agreements with Canada: Provides that money authori zed under this Act for expenditure in respect of an agreement with the Government of Canada ma y be expended in ant icipation of the agreement being entered into.

Section 8(2) Expenditures in anticipation: Provides authori ty to expend money on projects for which the Government of Canada will not cost share or will only partially cost share project costs.

Section 9 Abatement of Authority: Provides that expenditures made under Special Warrants issued pursuant to Orders-in-Council shall be deemed to have been made under the authori ty of this Act and the said Special Warrants shall cease to have effect on the coming into force of this Act.

Section 10 Application of money: A standard

Section which requires no further explanation.

Tuesda� August 30, 1988

Section 11 Power to borrow: Included in this Bill to enable the Government to borrow money in the '88- 89 fiscal year , prior to app roval of the 19 88 Appropriation Act. This

Section provides authority to raise money by way of loan or loans up to $300 million, as may be considered necessary for making any required payments out of the Consolidated Fund. Mr. Chairman, with these comments, I commend the Bill to the Members of the committee. Mr. James Carr (fort Rouge): I would like to ask a couple of questions, if I could, to the Minister of Culture (Mrs. Mitchelson). Over the last number of years we have seen a tremendous growth in gaming revenues available to the Government of Manitoba.

I believe the first year of these revenues was back in 1972 or '73 growing at an astronomical pace, really, until this year when I think the gross figure was something in excess of $250 million, of which Government keeps something over $50 million. I would like to ask the Minister if she has had an opportunity to review the best ways in which these gaming revenues can be spent. To be precise, we noticed in the Estimates that some $1 million had been taken out of the appropriation for the public library services, so we can only now conclude that these services will now be funded out of Lotteries revenues.

I wonder if the Min ister could tell us if that is the case. Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Mi nister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation): Mr. Chairman, I am sure the Member is aware the needs assessment is still going on. I was hoping that you would have the results of that by the middle of August, I believe was the first date that I was given by the consultants.

But as a result of some perceived lack of factual information in the Phase 2 report of the Needs Assessment Study, I have asked the consultants and the advisory groups to get together again and straighten out the facts, make sure that the information I am presented with is indeed the facts, because how can I deal with a study that has been done which does not present the true picture? I am waiting in anticipation for that process to take place.

I am sure the Member is aware that there are several different groups, umbrella groups, that the consultants are going to have to meet with again and go over the results of the report and ensure that all the information is correct, and that the final report which is presented will indeed be one that I can work with and make some decisions on, based on fact and full information.

With regard to the libraries funding from Lotteries, I have attempted to explain in the House and I guess maybe I have not been clear enough or the Opposition is not just understanding clearly that, yes, indeed, libraries funding for the City of Winnipeg will be coming out of Lotteries, in the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation, and the Member knows that, I am sure, that a certain portion of Lotteries revenue, some $14 . some-million dollars, is given to the Department of Cultur e, Heritage and Recreation on a yearly basis for expenditures.

So, therefore, part of the Department of 905 Culture, Heritage and Recreation is being funded out of Lotteries revenues and part of it is being funded out of appropriation. That has been on ongoing thing for a great period of time and some salaries for the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation were in the past being funded out of Lotteries revenues that came to the department and part of the libraries programming for the City of Winnipeg was also coming out of Lotteries revenues in the past. lt was a small portion, I have to say, but there was some.

The Provincial Auditor has cautioned the department in the past that operating funding and salaries for the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation should all be coming out of one place. Actual ly, operating funding should not be coming out of the Lotteries revenues, it should be coming out of the appropriation portion of the department. There were 23 salaries and operating costs that were being funded out of the Lotteries portion and it was a matter of poor accounting. The Auditor wanted to see some semblance of order and some reorganization restructure.

So what in fact we have done is taken those 23 salaries and operating costs for the department out of the Lotteries portion which you know is just discussed during the Estimates process at the end of Culture, Heritage and Recreation. There is no combined discussion of Lotteries fundin g and appropriation funding. An Honourable Member: No vote on it. * (16 00) Mrs. Mitchelson: No, and there is no vote on it. So what we have done, in fact, is make a transfer.

The salaries have been placed into appropriation and the remainder of the Winnipeg Library's funding has been placed into the Lotteries portion of the Department of Culture, Heritage and Recreation. So it has just been an even trade for purposes of accounting. There is no new mony coming out of Lotteries. I am not saying it is the best way to fund anything. I am not saying that half of the department should be funded out of Lotteries and half should be funded through appropriation.

I am saying we should have some better method, but in the short term, all we could possibly do is attempt to balance for the Provincial Auditor the books and the operating funding in the salaries so that it could be discussed during the Estimate process in a proper manner and in a proper fa shion, and th at the programming portion was moved over into Lotteries. That may sound confusing-that is as simply as I can explain it. So ther

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-1-26
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 1st hansardpdf 26.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d176781dac7d6d5580ebfcafa74673fe63d8562d

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