Manitoba Hansard — 28 November 1977 (Sitting 3A, 31st Legislature, 1st Session)

31-1-3a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 First Session - Thirty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Vol. XXV No. 3A 26 Elizabeth 11 Published under the authority of The Honourable Harry E. Graham Speaker 2:30 p.m.Monday, November 28, 1977 Printed by P. N. Crosbie - Queens Printer for the Province of Manitoba

Time: 2:30 p.m. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY of MANITOBA Monday, November 28, 1977 OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham (Birtle-Russell): Presenting Petitions ... Reading and Receiving Petitions ... Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees ... Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports. The Honourable Min ister of Finance. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS HON DONALD CRAIK (Riel): Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a copy of the Public Accounts for the year ended March 31s t, 1977. Mr. Speaker, I have a further an nouncement to the House I would like to make.

It is with regards to Canadian Co-Op Implements Limited. Over a period of some ten months or so discussions have been held between C!Cl8L, the Province of Manitoba, the Province of Saskatchewan, the Province of Alberta and the Federal Government. MR. EDWARD SCHREYER Leader of the Opposition (Rossmere): Mr. Speaker, I don't wish to interrupt my hon ourable friend but it would be helpful if the usual five copies would be circulated. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I must apologize, I don't have the full number of copies here. It is a very short statement though. I'll get one over to the Leader of the Oppositio n. Mr.

Speaker, the nature of the discussions has centered around the need of CCIL for improved funding by way of additional capital, loans or loan guarantees. The final decision concerning participation by the Province of Mani toba had not been made prior to our government taking office. The Cabinet has considered the various proposals under discussions and arrived at a decision which I forwarded to CCIL on Friday last, November 25th.

The decision was essentially stated as follows: "We have attempted to deal with your request as dispassionately as possible and in the limited time available and in spite of our desire to support the interests of the Co-Op sector of our society we have come to the conclusion that we cannot at this time commit public funds to that end." MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, the statement having been received, although a short statement, having been received just in a matter of minutes, I would nevertheless like to make some observatio ns directly relating to the statement. The first would be to acknowledge that there has been indication for a period of several months now that there was financ ial difficulty being faced by Can adian Co-Operative Implements Limited. It would be also fair to say that the magnitude of the amount of financing required was substantial.

It is necessary to note however, Sir, that because of the nature of this operatio n, principally over the three prairie provinces, that there was need for some discussion interprovincially between Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. There was some effort made to pre-brief the representatives of the governments of the other two provinces as well. This was done, as I recall, in late August and in the month of September.

Whether or not at this juncture it is necessary to say with the finality that this statement would seem to imply that there is no basis for further exploration of ways and means that this problem can be alleviated, not simply on Manitoba action alone but to some degree in proportion at least by the Provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta. That, Sir, has to be regarded as a possibility.

So in light of that I want to make the point, Sir, that there is need to make sure that no ring of finality is injected here when, in fact, other provinces that have some degree of historical and current interest in this Canadian Co-operative Implements have been thoroughly canvassed as to their position with respect to it. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion ... In troduction of Bills. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable House Leader. HON. WARNER JORGENSON(Morris): Mr. Speaker, we have an introduction to perform at this stage. HON. STERLING LYON, Premier{Charleswood): Mr.

Speaker, I have the honour to present to you Warren Steen, the member for the electoral division of Crescentwood, who has taken the oath and signed the role and now claims the right to take his seat. 35

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: That right is properly his. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. SIDNEY GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Is it the Minister of Finance's intention to announce the rejection of loans or financial assistance to people who have made them, thereby putting the people who have sought help from the government in a position of having a public announcement that they have been refused? What does the minister achieve by announcing that he has refused a loan to CCI L?

Could he not merely communicate that he is not able to entertain the loan or is this the practice that the government intends to follow- to announce publicly to a company who has made an application that it is rejecting that application? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CRAIK(Riel): Mr. Speaker, in reply to the Member for lnkster's question, the announcement has been made primarily for the purpose of convenience to the CCIL itself. A MEMBER: They can't do that. 8MR. CRAIK: Well, Mr.

Speaker, before the honourable members across the way become too exercised, the deadline required by the company for a reply was last Saturday and, Mr. Speaker, it was our intention to not announce it in the danger that it may imperil their position vyith regard to other financial arrangements. Their recommendation to us was that they would prefer it otherwise, that we should make the statement of our position based on the history that has gone on since January of 1977 with the former government. So our intention in doing this, Mr.

Speaker, is to make it as easy as possible for the company to deal with it and to state as clearly as possible the position of the government and that's what we did. If it had not been for the discussion with the Co-op Implements people as of last Saturday, this statement would have come from them rather than from us. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. GREEN: A supplementary question. Do I take it that the minister's announcement today in the House was made publicly at the request of CCIL? MR. CRAIK: Well, Mr.

Speaker, we don't make announcements in the House at the request of any private party or organization but let me repeat to you that it has been made in the House after discussion with CCI La nd with the knowledge on our part that we were not in any way detracting from their well-being as a company. It would have been our intention to make no announcement, Mr. Speaker, if there was any possibility at all of impeding their likelihood or possibility of carrying on other financial negotiations.

And, to repeat for the Honourable Member for I nkster, the deadline for a decision by the government was the end of last week, and in the short period of time we had to deal with it we had to make it. I trust that they had to make their decisions on Saturday - I don't know what their decisions were - but they felt that it would be as wel I if we were to make public our position and that is what we have done.

This isn't a matter of stating policy of what we intend to do with other requests that come to the government, it has been done actually through discussion with them and the belief on our part, and the acquiesc ence - not necessarily acquiesc ence - but the position, their position, being that it would be better if foi us to make an announcement than otherwise. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster, another supplementary. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. I am not quite certain I understood my honourable friend's meaning.

When my previous question was asked whether it was made at the request of them he said that they don't make announcements at the request of people. I accept it although I don't see what harm there would be if it was made at their request. Was this afternoon's announcement made with the approval of CCIL on the basis that it would not hurt their operations to have it publicly announced that you are rejecting their application for support? MR. CRAIK: That is what I said, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR.

SCHREYER: I would like to direct a question to the First Minister and ask him whether he has, with respect to the coalition of women's groups on family law, the coalition itself or any of the components such as the Provincial CounGil of Women, received a brief and met with the coalition or any component group with respect to their concerns bearing on family law? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. 36

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. We haven't received a brief; I think I received a letter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. MR. HOWARD PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would direct my question to the Honourable the Attorney General. Would the Honourable the Attorney-General advise the House as to the terms of reference which he has provided to the Board of Review dealing with family law. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourab le Attorney-General. HON. GERALD W. J. MERCIER (Osborne): Mr.

Speaker, Sir, I would be more than pleased to amplify on those terms of reference when I have an opportunity to introduce the bill. MR. PAWLEY: A supplementary question. Would the Honourable the Attorney-General advise this House as to the fees or remuneration being paid to members of the Board of Review dealing with family law. MR. MEIER: Mr. Speaker, Sir, the same rate as the previous government. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for The Pas. MR. RONALD McBRYDE: Mr. Speaker, a question to the First Minister for clarification. Has the First Minister refused to meet with the family law coalition? MR.

SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have another question? MR. McBRYDE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the non-answer means that he has refused to meet with the family law coalition. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. Has the member a supplementary question? MR. McBRYDE: A supplementary question. Has the First Minister refused to refused to give any press interviews in regard to the family law issue? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MR. LLOYD AXWORTHY: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Ministei responsible for the Manitoba Develop ment Corporation and Flyer Industries - I assume that is the Minister of Industry and Commerce. Has the minister met with the representatives of that company to ascertain whether the statements they made concerning the potential closed own of Western Flyer Coach is imminent in the next two or three months and how that will affect the outstanding orders that the Flyer Industries still has with the City of Winnipeg? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. HON.

ROBERT (Bob) BOB BANMAN (La Verendrye): In reply to the question, Mr. Speaker, to the Member for Fort Rouge. First of all let me say that back in January 6, 1977, there was a notice sent to the Minister of Labour of that government notifying that as of March 99 employees would be laid off and as of April 150, because of the slowdown in the number of contracts that company was receiving.

What has happened is that with the orders that are being filled for the city of Winnipeg contracts and no firm orders in the hands of the particular Flyers In dustries at the time, the notice went out to the Minister of Labour on November 16 for additional layoffs. I should point out that the company is actively out in the field sol iciting contracts. We have several that are apparently going to be; we are going to have word on them within a couple of days so we hope that we can minimize the number of people that we lay off by being able to attract more new contracts. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. Fort Rouge with a supplementary question. MR. AXWORTHY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to that minister or to the Minister of Urban Affairs. Can the government considering its moral commitment, I believe is the word that's used, to the City of Winnipeg, ensure that all the buses contracted with Flyer In dustries will be delivered to the City of Winnipeg within a reasonable amount of time or before such major layoffs or cl osedowns would occur? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of In dustry and Commerce. 37

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. BANMAN: In reply to that question, Mr. Speaker, there is no problem there. We're deliveri ng buses right now at a rate of five a week and I understand that by the time the winter months have lapsed we should have all the buses delivered and there is no fear of not fulfilling that order. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, still in relation to the last series of questions and ask the Minister of Ind ustry and Commerce whether any specific course of action is being taken to attempt to take advantage of the fact that in the course of the past several months the value of the Canadian dollar has changed by ten percentage points approximately and that this affords an opportunity to better take advantage of outside of Canada, or in other words, U.S. sales, is any systematic action being taken then with respect to the relative improvement in price competitiveness? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of In dustry and Commerce.

MR. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, in reply to that question let me say that I understand that the sales force of Flyer is actively engaged in trying to solicit as many contracts as they can. So to answer that question, yes, they're out in the field. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for ln kster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, a suppleme ntary question on the same subject.

Would the minister inquire from t�e Flyer Board of Directors as to whether there is any feasibility in improving its sales position for the Board of Directors of that company to enter a lawsuit against the Win nipeg Free Press for wrongfully slande ring the product produced by Flyer In dustries Limited when the City of Winnipeg has indicated that Flyer's buses operate as efficiently or better than those of its competitor, General Motors. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS (Brandon East): Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of In dustry and Commerce a question as relates to the . statement just made by the Minister of Finance on CCIL. Has the Minister or his department made any estimate of job lossage at the CCI L plant in Win nipeg because of the refusal of finan cial assistance or loans by this government? Have you made any estimates or are you at all investiga ting the question of further layoffs in the city of Winnipeg ? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of In dustry and Commerce. MR. BANMAN: Let me answer that question, Mr.

Speaker, by saying that the majority of lay offs occurred under the previous administration and I'm wondering whether the minister at that time, when most of the people were laid off, conducted such a study. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, as I have to get used to being on the opposition's side, my friend has to get used to being the Minister of In dustry and Commerce and take his responsibility for the people of Manitoba and I would like to know right here and now, what is he going to do for jobs for people at CCIL? You have the responsibility.

Tell the people what you're going to do for the people that are working at CCIL. MR. JORGENSON: That intemperate outburst of the Member for Bran don East is clearly out of order. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of In dustry and Commerce. MR. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, the first priority of this government is trying to clean up the mess the previous minister left. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Hono urable the Attorney-General.

Would the Honourable the Attorney-General advise this House whether or not he's agreed to any requests for meetings with the Coalition on Family Law or any component thereof? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-Gen eral. MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, I have had an opport unity to meet with some groups. There are, as the honou rable member is well aware, a large number of groups. I will, after having an opport unity to speak on second reading of the bill, hopefully be able to supply them with more specific information on which they can make their submissions to the Family Law Review Committee. 38

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk, with a supplementary question. MR. PAWLEY: A supplementary question in relationship to the answer that the government is paying members of the review board a salary commensurate with that which was paid earlier by the previo us government. I would like the honourable member to advise whether he is referring to the remuner ation paid to members of the Law Reform Commission by the previous government that were studying family law. MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, if the honour able member would file an order of return, I will produce the necessary information. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary from the Member for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, the former government committed itself to the formation of a committee dealing with maintenance and enforcement thereof. Is it the honourable member's intention to honour that commitment made by the former government to establish a committee to investigate the enforceability of maintenance orders issued in the province of Manitoba? MR. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, Sir, I've just in fact today received further information with regard to that matter and it is under review, and decisions will be made as soon as we have an opportunity to give it further consideration. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Health and Social Development. Can he indicate whether, in the present program of cutbacks, the government is examining and reviewing the construction of the Seven Oaks Hospital with a view to either curtailing it or changing its use at that particular site? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. L.R. (BUD) SHERMAN, Minister of Health and Social Development, Fort Gar ry): Yes, Mr. Speaker, the government is doing just that. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, with a supplementary. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, in view of the minister's reply, can he indicate what particular arrangements they would be making with the construction company of E.K. Mason which has already been awarded, I believe, a $20 million constru ction contract?

Has he asked the Attorney General's office to determine whether there are legal problems extricating themselves from that contract? Have they informed the company of their intention to review or to curtail the construction of it? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would inform the honourable member that all those ramifications are being taken into consideration.

My direct answer to him, with specific reference to his specific question, is "No, at this juncture," but the whole subject is being reviewed and obviously if some change of course or change of direction is determined upon by the Executive Council where Seven Oaks is concerned, those arrangements and negotiations are going to have to be entered into. But that is the next step down the line. The determination may be made not to make any change at all. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, with a final supplementary. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr.

Speaker, considering the importance of that particular review that the minister has announced or indicated they're unundertaking, can he tell us what the scheduling of this review might be? How long will it take and when he may be prepared to make an announcement really whether the hospital will go ahead or not. MR. SHERMAN: Well, I hope the government will be in a position to do that very soon, Mr. Speaker.

The question is under review by the government, not simply by the Department of Health and Social Development, but by the government, and we recognize the importance of the ramifications to the question that the honoura ble member has raised. As a consequence, we would like to come to that decision as quickly as possible. I can't put a date on it except to say that it's a priority question for my department and my colleagues. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. JAY COWAN: Mr. Speaker, I'd liketo direct a question to the Minister of Mines, Resources and Environmental Management.

Could the minister confirm that a major uranium deposit has been discovered by Mid-North Uranium Limited in the north-western corner of this province? 39

Monday, November 28, 1977 mr. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. HON. BRIAN RANSOM, Minister of Mines, Resources and Environmental Management (Souris Killarney): Mr. Speaker, the company in question is responsible for making their own an nouncements regarding finds. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Churchill, with a supplementary question. MR. COWAN: A supplementary then.

As reported in the press, could I ask the minister if it is not correct that a departmental official, or a government official, on Friday, November 18th, asked Mid North Uranium Limited to cancel a news conference at which the firm was to make an announcement of this find? MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, no one from my department asked that that news conference be cancelled. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill, with a final supplementary. MR. COWAN: A final suppl ementary, Mr. Speaker. Then I assume that he and many members of the opposition have been misquoted by the press.

Could the minister then confirm that Mid-North Uranium Limited is a joint venture arrangement with the province, and that the provinee has a fifty percent interest in the discovery? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR. RANSOM: I'm not sure, Mr. Speaker, that the term "joint venture" is the correct one to use in this case, but there is definitely an agreement between the government and Mid-North, and again I'm not precise whether the figure is fifty percent or not. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. JIM WALDING: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health, and in view of his support for one of the family law bills at the last session, could he tell the House whether he has received a request from the Coalition on Family Law for a meeting? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Speaker. I may have. If I receive such a request, I will meet with them. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnks ter. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Mines.

I wonder if the Minister of Mines could assure both his constituents and mine and himself and myself that we will not be dispossessed of the present holdings that we now have in several mineral potentials, namely Granges Exploration in the Flin Flon area and the holdings that we have of uranium interests in northern Manitoba - that we will not be dispossessed of those interests. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, the matter of a minerals policy is under review at this time and we have no announcements to make in that regard. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster, with a suppl ementary. MR. GREEN: Well, Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. Is is what the minister saying that it is possible that the holdings that I and other members of this Chamber and all the people of the province of Manitoba have in the Granges Exploration and in the uranium potentials in northern Manitoba will be dispossessed of us? MR. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, the question is under review and we're looking at all possibilities. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR. LAURENT L. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to ask a question of the Minister of Health. I wonder if the minister could tell us - it might be, I thin k, that he suggested the government will have to decide, not the department - if it is felt that there is less of a need than was origina lly thought for personal care homes in Manitoba, and less of a waiting list than there was a few months ago. 40

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I don't know that I can answer that question at this point in the life and of this ministry this administration, but certainly a topic that commands our attention and interest in the new government is the question of personal care homes, the need for them, the related question of proprietary personal care homes versus government operated homes. Once again I would have to say, Sir, that's it's the subject of an intensive review. I can't answer the minister more definitely than that. MR.

DESJARDINS: Unfortu nately I am no longer the minister, I am just the member for St. Boniface. The member referred to me as the minister. I might say, Mr. Speaker, that then my question is correct. The government is having second thought now about the need of more personal care homes because that commitment was made during the campaign and in the House. The First Minister, on a point of order, had been stating that he had a group of supermen in the cabinet, I wish he would let them answer and not butt in on every question I was asking. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. The Minister of Health. MR.

SHERMAN: I would say to the Honourab le Member for St. Boniface, the ex minister, that we're concerned about the budgetary position, the financial position of the taxpayers of Manitoba. We cannot determine at this juncture whether there will be an expansion of the personal care home program that was initiated or at least desired by the previous administration until we measure the resources available and the amount of need that's being met. I think the member would be the first to concede that where services of this kind are offered the demand rises in direct proportion. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St.

Boniface with a final supplementary. MR. DESJARDINS: I mentioned that for the last two or three years, but nevertheless, I was told . yes, my question is that my honourable friend agreed, or disagreed then, with the former health critic of the party that there was such a long waiting list and also with his First Minister, his leader, who during the campaign said definitely that our leader was scaring the public, the senior citizens, and that they would have their personal care homes, that nothing would be changed and nothing would be cancelled. That is my question and that is MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, all I can say to that is I a.gree with the former health critic of the party8 now in government and with my leader that the the previous First Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the member for St. Boniface were in a position that had its difficulties. We are attempting to resolve them as best we can within the financial constraints that the taxpayers find themselves in. We weren't certain that the previous administration was always doing that. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. WALDING: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister of Labour. It refers to a recent annou ncement by the AIB that the price of food has increased by 12.7 percent over the last twelve months. Could the minister inform the House what the rate of increase in wages has been in this province over a comparable period? A MEMBER: Do you want Orders for Return? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital with a supplementary question .. MR. WALDING: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the same minister.

Could the honourable minister confirm to the House that the rate of increase has been less than 12.7 percent8 . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MRS. PRICE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the question as notice. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Honourable the Attorney-General. Would the Honourable the Attor -General advise the House whether or not he has completed his review of the Jeroff case pertaining to the free bargaining plea bargaining? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. 41

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, that review has not been completed and I haven't had the reports submitted to me yet. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of Health, and Social /Development, who I understand is also responsible for Rehabilitation Services. I wonder if he could advise the House whether the Kelly Centre Project for rehabilitation of alcoholic offenders in Brandon, whether this project will proceed.

As you know, it was planned under the previous government as a very important investment in human lives. Could you please advise the House whether this project will proceed or not? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. Mr. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to advise the honourable member as soon as a decision has been made. No decision has been made on that question. MR. SPEAKER: Has the member for Brandon East a supplementary? MR. EVANS: A supplementaryt, .

The honourable minister, I trus realizes the matter has been fully researched and plans were in the making to institute this particular project at the old Indian Residential School. Would the minister agree that this is a very important project because ... We have a few is a very importantfacetious members of the government interjecting, Mr. Speaker, but this project in terms of the saving of lives, preventing of suicide prevention of fatal accidents and so on. Would you assureouse that this matter will be given top priority in your consideration? MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I assure the honoura ble member that it will be given urgent priority. I would ask him whether he woul dn't agree that a top priority is to get the bank account of the province and the taxpayers back in shape? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. MR. BOSTROM: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the First Minister.

In view of the reports on freezes on various government programs, particularly with respect to the Pob reation rogram, previously announced by the previous government, does the First Minister intend to announce a program or programs to deal with the immediate problem of unemployment in this province in this session? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, as and when any announcements of that nature are ready for annou ncement, they will be announced. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable of the Opposition. ave aaqution for the inister of ealth. MR. SCH MYER: Mr.

Speaker, I h I would iketo ask the minister whether, inasmuch as it was said of the previous administration's pace of construction of personal care homes wasn't adequate, whether he can give an indication as to when he will have the plans ready for notice or tabling here, as to how they propose to build personal care homes even faster? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would say to the Honourable, the eader I LI of the Opposition, that I will undertake to give that indication just as soon as possible, just as quickly as I can.

I think the honourable gentleman would appreciate that there is a volume of work and a myriad of decisions that have to be made by any new government. He faced the same situation in 1969 and I can't give him that kind of an answer today. I will attemptto do so within the next very few weeks. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. BoniOace. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the Honourable Minister of Health, and he might take the question on notice if he wishes, if he hasn't got the information.

I would like to know if the Kinsmen Refit Program is still on line or, the grant committed by the former government, has that been frozen, is that under review and study also? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. 42

Monday, November 28, 1977 MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the honourable member that the project is one that commends itself to us and of it's very keen interest to my department. It's unfortunate ly covered in the freeze and review that all such projects are caught in at the present time and the member will appreciate that we can't make specific exceptions in a precipito us way, but it's very much in contemplation. MR. SPEAKER: A supple mentary question, the Honourable Member for St. Boniface. MR.

DESJARDINS This is not a program of the government, this was a grant of the government, but these people have been working for a number of years and it may well be this is being studied. I can serve notice but I'll ask the minister wed cost will be the result of these freezes and all these programs, and these emergencies and priority programs but this program has nothing to do with the government except a certain grant. -(Interjection)- Well, my question is, will they go ahead or is this government, this free-enterprising government, going to take over from all the private enterprise programs also? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member's question may perhaps point up the essential difference between the previo us government and the present government. For the information of the honourable member, the ReFit project does carry with it a price tag to the taxpayers of Manitoba in terms of operating costs and that is the decision that has to be reviewed. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr.

Speaker, on the Jame subject of the effects of these cutbacks, can the Minister indicate that as a consequence of the cutback on air travel, that the Parkland Region of the province is now without psychiatric services that were previously supplied from Brandon - or probation services - and can he indicate whether in fact the province is going to allow the lack of psychiatric services in the Parkland region or whether it has alternative services to be provided at the present moment? I MR. SPEAKER: The Honourab le Ministe� of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, the honoura ble member raises a good question and one that is under review by my department at the present time and in front of management committee. We are asking for special exemptions for the costs of just such services as those to which the member refers. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge with a supplementary. MR. AXWORTHY: Yes, a supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I think that the Minister's answer raises a broader question .

As the government has gone through these varieties of reviews and assessments, is it providing any alternative or supplementary programs, even of a temporary nature, for those essential services that are being frozen or rescinded, and can he indicate what areas of the health programs and the delivery of services are presently being cut back or frozen at this time and what special exemptions are being asked for? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I don't know what programs have been cut back or rescinded other than the construction programs.

The Home Care and programs of that nature, Care Services and Homemaker Services are being maintained. The subject of necessary air travel for probation officers, parole officers, psychiatric officers, as I told him, is in the hands of a special committee of the government at the present time and exemptions are being sought. Up to this point, I don't don't know of any such services that have been curtailed or rescinded. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Member for Fort Rouge with a final supplementary. MR. AXWORTHY: Yes, a final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, just on the last point made by the Minister.

Does he or the members of his department know exactly which services have been affected by the reduction or curtailment of air services in his department and can he detect which communities or which regions are present ly without services that they previously enjoyed as a consequ ence of that decision by the government? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, to give the honourable member a specific answer, I would ask his indulg ence in permitting me to take the question as notice. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, my question is unrelated to the previous question so perhaps the Minister of Health would wish to take it as notice. It has to do with the alleged distress surrounding the arrangements for the funeral of a Manitoban who in so many ways might be described as 43

Monday, November 28, 1977 legendary, a war hero, and in view of the alleged distress, would the honourable minister undertake to advise whether anything appropriate need or could be done - not alone, perhaps in conjunction with the Legions or with Veterans' Affairs Canada - with respect to this problem? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable the Leader of the Opposition for his question and I assure him that this minister will look into it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. A.R.(Pete )ADAM: Thankyou very much, Mr. Speaker.

I direct my question to the same Minister of Health and ask him if, under the freeze that they have imposed on Manitoba Health Services capital projects and in reviewing of the different projects, what guidelines are used, how many are coming back, are you going to hold off everything until you have revwed the entire program or are you going to give those projects the priority that some of them no doubt deserve? I refer specifically to the health care home at Winnipegosis. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Speaker, I am sure the honourable member appreciates that in the list of projects, everybody connected with every individual project has his or her own sense of urgency and priority about it. -(Interjection)- My honourable friend, the Member for St. Boniface says that's why I leave it to the Commission; that's why it's being reviewed at the present time by the Executive Council with advice from the Commission and other parties and quarters. I can only say to the honourable member that I objectively have to look at the whole range of projects as all having very high priorities.

We're going to have to make some very tough decisions but they'll have to be made and they'll have to be made within the next very few weeks. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose with a supplementary. MR. ADAM: Thankyou, Mr. Speaker. On any of those projects that you you made any decisions yet? have reviewed to date, have MR. SHERMAN: Not decisions, Mr. Speaker, of the kind that the honourable member is implying. I infer from his question that he's asking, have we made specific decisions, such as this one is in and this one is out? No, we haven't made that kind of decision. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. GREEN: I would like to address a question to the Minister Without P portfolio in charge of the Task Force. In response to many questions of various programs, we've had it indicated that it is being reviewed by Management Committee. Can the honourable minister advise me who is reviewing management committee? Management Committee? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. HON. SIDNEY SPIVAK(River Heights): Mr. Speaker, the Task Force. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. SAM USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask a question of the Minister of Health or Environment with respect to the current pollution problem at East Selkirk and whether there is any determination as to the amount of pollution caused by Right Angle Farms, the large feed lot just east of Highway 59. It has been established, Mr. Speaker, that there has been several counts taken on the drainage ditches and on the creek running alongside that farm. I am wondering whether the minister is aware - either one of the two ministers. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address a question to the honourable the First Minister, to asc�r!ain whether or n�t there has been any payment made, interim or otherwise, to the three deputy ministers whom he fired before he became premier. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. LYON: A question of that nature was asked the other day. To the best of my knowledge, that matter is being dealt with routinely by the Civil Service Commission. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns with a supplementary. MR. CHERNIACK: Does that answer confirm that the First Minister has no knowledge as to 44

Monday, November 28, 1977 whether or not there has been any payment made? Mr. Speaker' for the record, he is answering, "No, he has no knowledge." MR. LYON: For the record, Mr. Speaker, to correct my honourable friend, o is adept at always twisting words, for the record, the First Minister Minister is aware of the fact that the Civil Service Commission is dealing With this in a routine manner, as has now been said three times. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Johns with a final supplementary. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, would the First Minister find it possible to make certain that his gestures are not misunderstood, by rising and answering a question rather than mumbling from his seat? MR. LYON: I would equally suggest that my honourable friend could contact the three deputy ministers in question and get the information much sooner, which is probably what he's done. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. I would like to bring it to the attention of the House that the normal time for questioning has now expired. If it is your wish to continue, otherwise I will continue with the Orders of the Day. MR. JORGENSON: Mr.

Speaker, by leave, I wonder if I may make a statement with respect to the Business of the House. MR. SPEAKER: Agreed? (Agreed) BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE MR. JORGENSON: In discussions with the House Leader of the Official Opposition, we have come to an agreement which of course is dependent upon the wish of the House and will require unanimous consent, that rather than proceeding with the motion that is on the Order Paper for extended hours of sitting, that the House will sit three sessions daily Monday through to Friday and that there will be two separate sessions.

In other words, the morning session will be a separate session. The afternoon will be a separate session and will be concluded during the evening sitting and the normal hours of sitting will apply; that is from 10 o'clock until 12:3 0, from 2:30 until 5:30 and from 8:00 until 10: 00. If that arrangement meets with the approval of the House then tomorrow morning we will be sitting at 10 o'clock. MR. SPEAKER: Is there approval for that type of arrangement? Does the Honourable Member for lnkster have some comment? MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member has correctly indicated what we spoke about.

I appreciate that, Mr. Speaker, the honourable member not once referred to the speed-up motion, he has now adopted the correct nomenclature, namely a motion to extend the hours of sitting. The one part of it that we did not discuss specifically was whether we would change the hours on Wednesday and Friday and I wonder whether we could agree that everything else applies and that I would discuss with him, because I did not discuss with our group Wednesday and Friday, but that everything else applies.

We would sit every morning and I am sure that arrangements can be made with regard to Wednesday and Friday which normally terminate at 5:30. I didn't get it clear whether he wanted to sit evenings on those days. If he does I don't think there will be any difficulty, but I would have to clear it with the honourable members, but in the meantime we could agree to sit mornings starting tomorrow. · MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. MR. JORGENSON: It was my understanding that the hours of sitting would apply five days throughout the week, Monday through until Friday. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, I gather that such a motion needs leave of the House or agreement on it. I would ask the House Leader if he could indicate what would happen in the occasion when Committee meetings would be held, would those run concurrently with the sessions or would the Committee meetings displace the sessions under this arrangement! MR. JORGENSON: No, Mr. Speaker, the Committee meetings if held outside the House would displace the sessions. ORDERS OF THE DAY 45

Monday, November 28, 1977 THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MR. SPEAKER: On the adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable member for Pembina and the amendment thereto by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, it will be with some difficulty that I speak today having a bad sore throat and cold8 but I will do my best. I would like to begin by extending my congratulations to you as the new Speaker of the Legislature.

It is quite a switch from your role of the past several years when you were regarded by the administration that I was a member of as sort of a crusading detective or shadow on the Attorney General of the Province. I would also like to extend congratulations to the new Cabinet before I dissect some of them and I would also like to extend condolences to some of the experienced backbenchers that didn't make the cut. I think there are clearly some people in the backbench who are equal to or superior to the front benchers. My colleague from St. Boniface incorrectly referred to the supermen on the other side.

He said the new Premier had talked about his supermen. Well, that wasn't quite his terminology. What he said was that he had an embarassment of riches and that they were all No. 1, first grade, kiln-dried material, just couldn't choose from this tremendous selection. Well, Mr. Speaker, I found that statement rather astonishing in view of the make-up of the two sides, namely that the present government contains four ex-ministers facing thirteen ex-ministers and five new ministers with no legislative experience. I also regard it has a serious error that the Cabinet was reduced in size.

Four or five of the present ministers have a double work load and some have almost nothing to do. Mr. Speaker, I regard as a rule of thumb the following: that if you have two or moreT portfolios that are of sufficient size that you do not, in fact, run both departments that hat what happens is that a minister with two medium or heavy portfolios runs one and his deputy minister runs the other, and I think that given some of the talk that we heard during the election and so on - the dangers of bureaucracy, concern about the Civil Service running wild, etc. - I found that a very foolhardy measure.

It looks good, cut the Cabinet, save a couple of salaries, save an office here and an office there, cut a deputy miniter or two and a few secretaries, but in the end what you really do is, I think, make the job of government more difficult. You know, Mr. Speaker, when we came into the Chamber on Thursday I expected that we would be facing a formidable group, the new government. I thought that we would look across and we would see a bunch of MLA's who would look like the cat that swallowed the canary. Instead all I see is a bunch of people who only look like the only thing they could swallow is a can of Dr.

Ballard's. These are the new "Lyons", the pride of "Lyons" who have swept the province. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think they look more like a bunch of pussycats. I would like to look at some of the assignments that have been given out to some of the ministers. One of the heaviest is to the Attorney-General and he has already been told, I think, by municipal people that they don't feel he can properly handly the number of portfolios that he has. I don't think this is any reflection on his ability, I don't think this is any reflection on his ability to handle a work load.

I just think that the work load that he has been given is totally unrealistic and the municipal people are asking that he be given a smaller work load. I think the people from the City of Winnipeg, the councillors and the mayor, should also demand that the Urban Affairs portfolio should not just be thrown in with the whole assortment of miscellaneous portfolios that are really too much for any one man to handle. I think we should take a good look at him, because if he tries to handle that portfolio over the next four years he is going to age significantly.

And our task in the next election will be rather interesting because, if he retains his portfolios, when he fights the next election and he is overturned by Ian Turnbull we will have the equivalent of knocking off three or four ministers. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has the heaviest, one of the heaviest, assignments in the government and I read with some interest his interview, and some of the other interviews that were given by the new ministers, they weren't very informative, but the Minister of Health sat smoking in his office as he explained his new health programs.

Then we have another double threat, the Minister of Industry and Commerce, the Minister of Tourism and Recreation, and he is described as a businessman, .. somebody who is hardheaded. And what is he doing, Mr. Speaker, what is his approach at this particular time? I was expecting that we could have some dynamic new thrusts in the field of industry and commerce and tourism and instead what he is doing is winding down and grinding down the government financed businesses before he sells them.

You know, a good businessman would take the opposite approach, a good businessman would build up his business, build up his image and sell when the market is high. This Minister of Industry and Commerce he is going to run down, physically and verbally, these government financed operations and then he is going to sell them for ten cents on the dollar. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to welcome the new Minister of Education.

I might tell you that he and I once served together at Stonewall Collegiate, I was invading his territory as a person who commutes from Winnipeg, but I spent a year on their staff and I have known him from the time I first worked there some 15 years ago. He is from Bobby Bend's home town but I don't think that is a good model to follow. I am sure he admires the former Leader of the Liberal Party, but his career is not one to be emulated. I wish him well, and I might suggest that he might begin his career as a minister by giving 46

Monday, November 28, 1977 courses in remedial English to some of his colleagues because I saw on television, both on the regular news and on the news on the cable outlets, all of the new ministers being sworn in and some of them didn't read very well and they were having an awful time taking their oaths and getting sworn into the Cabinet. A MEMBER: Which one Russ? MR. DOERN: Well, I think that just about all of them, I don't remember any one ne who did a very good job so you might review the tapes yourself.

I w anted to address some comments to the Minister of Public Works but unfortunately he isn't here so I would just say that it has been interesting watching him in action over the last few months. One of the first things he did, Mr. Speaker, was to call tor a complete review of the Fire Commissioner's reports in Manitoba, and he said that what he would do, in effect, is examine them and then announce his action.

So, he undertook a very quick study and then he announced his new program and we all waited breathlessly tor the new announcement of the new government's program, something that wasn't under review tor too long, and his announcement was that the government was going to change the legislation so that they wouldn't have to do anything for a long time. In other words the new policy was inaction, they are going to amend the legislation for the fire commissioner's requirements so that they don't have to do anything so that they won't be in violation of the law. Well, that is a very strange approach, Mr. Speaker.

And then the minister was asked questions about some of the buildings that he had frozen, and this is the kind of leadership that he provides. He says that the Brandon Jail, which is under construction, won't be affected. And how did he come to this conclusion. He was talking about a freeze on construction and a reporter said to him, "What about the Brandon Jail, it is under construction?" The Minister said, "Oh, well, if that is true the construction will continue as planned." That is the kind of leadership that we are getting and the kind of t-charge planning that we are getting from the new government. Mr.

Speaker, I tried to determine something about the new Cabinet by reading the papers. I think that probably one of the most interesting , if not amusing, columns written on the new Cabinet came from Harry Mardon, the Associate Editor, learned business editor of the Winnipeg Tribune and he picked his Cabinet. He was wrong on a few points. For instance, he said that the Member tor St. James would become the Minister of Labour, that the Member for Crescentwood would be the Minister of Municipal Affairs, that the Member tor St.

Matthews would be in charge of what he calls employment and youth services8 I didn't know we had that portfolio corrections would be the Member for Rock Lake. A MEMBER: What about the Member for Wolseley. MR. DOERN: No, nobody mentioned the Member for Wolseley. He would have been good tor progressive social development, he is a representative, I think, of the new breed of member that the Conservative party has thrown up. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to also run over the three ministers without portfolio. The first one, number one, I guess there's a batting order here. No. I from River Heights, he was described by Mr.

Marden in the following fashion. He said, "Being a millionaire he must know something about how to balance a budget - good thinking - "and he will be kept so busy he won't have time to engage in any palace revolutions if he is so inclined." Well, Mr. Speaker, there is a stran ge irony here.

When I came into the Cabinet in 19708 I was given a car which turned out to be the car of the Member tor River Heights, and this time when he came into the Cabinet he was given my car which was a 1974 Cougar, but as soon as he realized that he was driving a Cougar and that this is really a mountain lion which is reminiscent of his leader, he immediately traded it in. He said he didn't want to get too close to that kind of image. He has already been shooting from the hip and from the lip.

One of my recollections of him, of course, is from the sixties, the mid-sixties, when he was the irrepressible drummer boy, the dynamic leader, or dynamic Ministei of Industry and Commerce, and he is already making statements which are prefaced by saying he has only had a superficial look but he is already finding out all sorts of interesting and revealing things. I thought one of the most interesting write-ups by Mr. Marden was for the Minister without Portfolio from Morris, the House Leader. Listen to this, he says, "What about good old Warner Jorgenson?" I am quoting from this article.

He said, "My proposal is that he be the Speaker of the Legislature, he has experience in both the House of Commons and the Manitoba Legislature, his even temper and sense of fairness will be much welcomed." Well, it is quite clear, Mr. Speaker, that Mr. Mardon never met the man and I would be quite happy some day to introduce them. And then, last and least, we have the third membei, the Member for Sturgeon Creek, and here is why he should be the Minister of Education in the opinion of Harry Marden. Now, this is what I call logic.

"He is qualified for the post because he is not a school teacher." In other words he doesn't know anything and therefore that would be excellent qualifications for a portfolio. And what did they give our honourable friend - MHRC. Well, Mr. Speaker, under the Conservative government that is an assignment to self-destruct. We know what they will do with MHRC, they will simply dismantle it so it will be very true that the Member tor Sturgeon Creek will, in fact, find himself out of a position in a very short period of time. 47

Monday, November 28, 1977 Mr. Speaker, just to conclude, I don't think that the original estimate of his men, made by the Premier, holds up. The Cabinet is green, it's still full of bark, full of holes, some is knotted and some is warped .. This is not what you'd call No. 1 kiln-dried lumber - it's what you'd call economy or low grade lumber. I was interested in the remarks of the Liberal, the lone Liberal, because all of a sudden he made the comment in his address that he wanted the $50 million in construction to proceed. Now, that, Mr.

Speaker, was an about-face because we li stened to him, for the last two years, criticize the development of housing and public works projects in the city of Winnipeg and throughout the province, and all of a sudden he's apparently seen the light. But that at least is something to take heart in. Mr. Speaker, what is the main problem of Can adian society in 1977? Is it inflationn, unemployment, conserv atisational unity? m, n/ What is the problem? Mr. Speaker, I say that it's unemployment of crisis proportions.

The Conservatives say it's inflation, they say that they're going to combine departments, they're going to balance the budget, they're going to give back succession duties, going to cut back on construction, all of this, all of this is their answer to unemployment in the Manitoba economy. They say that they believe in fiscal responsibility. Well, Mr. Speaker, nobody, nobody is for waste, n obody is for duplication, but there is such a thing as being penny-wise and pound-foolish. I ask the government, what are they doing about jobs? What is their program to counter six percent unemployment rising in the province?

Well, how do they answer - you know, actions speak louder than words. First, they announce a $50 million freeze on construction, that's their first program. Their second one is $130 million in health-care projects will be froe frozen. And then an assortment by the Minister of In dustry and Commerce of closing, winding down Flyer In dustries, Lord Selkirk, and so on. I didn't hear him say Morden Fine Foods, and I really would be interested to know what they're going to do there in the heart of the bedrock Tory country in the southwest. -(I nterje ction)- My seatmate says they're going to can it.

And then we saw a whole series of programs, Mr. Speaker, a whole series of programs, so-called, of restraint announced with bated breath. You know, it reminded me of the McCarthy hearings - remember those exciting revelations in the McCarthy era- it's before your time, in the 50's- and we had these dynamic conferences where the Minister of Finance would come and the Member for River Heights , he would come, and they would announce another new startling revelation. A MEMBER: An industry a week. MR. DOERN: Well, if you read some of these, you know, they don't really amount to anything.

I read this one release here - "New Restraint Policies Issued, Immediate Savings Will Result" -that was from the Member for River Heights. And some of these were really dynamic, like "All major expenditures would be reviewed by Management Committee." Well, we did that, Mr. Speaker, that was nothing there. Then, they were going to check the delegation of signing authorities. Well, we did that, Mr. Speaker - there's nothing new there. Then they were going to check more carefully on travel expenses. Well, we did that the last few years. They were going to examine film and video-tape productions.

I think we had a handle on that. Well, you're thin king of the city of Winnip eg. Mr. Speaker, they also said that they're going to freeze the purchase of automobiles. A MEMBER: No more electric cars. MR. DOE RN: Well, you know, they can do that, but what's the alternative? The alternative is to pay people money - there's a break-even point - and we believe that the present system is the best. Where someone drives over twelve thousand miles per year they're given a government car. That will prove to be the most economic system.

So, this is the kind of dynamic policy that we have from the new government at a time of layoffs from INCO, at a time when the C.N.R . is announcing layoffs, when there's been a recent deferral on hydro projects, and then we get, on top of this, these new programs frozen by the new government, adding to and aggravating the problem of unemployment in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, building permits are down, unemployment in the construction trade is rocketin g, and I read an interesting

article from the secretary of the Winnipeg Builders' Exchange, Ger vin Greasley, and he says that the temporary freeze by the Minister of Public Works will add 5 percent to the construct ion industry unemployment. I take that to be 1400 jobs that they're putting on ice.

And then he said this - and this was quite an interesting quote - he said, "We conceive that this government would have different priorities, but we didn't conceive the priority would be no construction at all." So, the Mini ster of Public Works nonchalantly announces his construction freeze and then he says, "Oh, we're just sitting back, just sitting back and taking a look at it," he says, you know, no rush, no problem. Well, I say that's not good enough, Mr. Speaker. I don't know how many jobs are at stake. My own calculation is 900, but the member from the Winnipeg Builders' Exchange, he says 1400.

The construction industry in Manitoba accounts for 17 percent of the Gross Provincial Product, and there is now 15 percent unemployment and predictions that it will hit 35 percent in the month of February. Right now is the worst time possible for a freeze on construction because it's the worst time of the year for the construct ion industry, and so we will aggravate and intensify the unemployment in the construction industry and in the province of Manitoba. I call on the minister to speed up this review. All we hear in question period is "U nder 48

Monday, November 28, 1977 review, under review" - that is the new catch phrase of the new administration. It isn't "We'll take the question as notice" or "I don't know" - it's "It's under review." And I can see that the new Premier at the Cabinet meeting said to all his new ministers, "Look, they'll ask you a bunch of questions - all you do is you say it's under review, and you just keep saying that, and, you know, a couple of years from now, I'll tell you what to say, but for now don't say anything, because, you know, you might blow it." Mr.

Speaker, the needs are the same as they were when we were in officee, the information is the same, the staff, essentially, is the same. And I say to the minister, let him look at the reports, let him pull the files, let him talk to his senior staff in Public Works, and let him untrack these projects instead of aggravating the problem of unemployment in Manitoba. This is a most serious problem facing our province today, and unfortunately the local P.C.s fail to recognize it. But, Mr. Speaker, there is one ray of hope.

I have to say to my colleagues that they should take heart because I have learned of a single new, original, unique, construction project planned by the new Lyon administration. This had nothing to do with our administration. They came up with this on their own. It's not a big project. It only cost about a half a million dollars, but it's a start. What is it? It's a tunnel. -(l nterjection) - A tunnel. The Tory tunnel which will link the Legislative Building firmly up to Great West Life. Now, Mr.

Speaker, they could have had an overpass for half the money but it wouldn't be discreet- too visible- there'd be too much traffic going back and forth- (Interjection) - especially at night - so it was worth the investment to untrack that amount of money to link up with the brains trust of the new administration. A MEMBER: Harry's going to tunnel to the Wordsworth Building. MR. DOERN: Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, we have been treated by the Member for River Heights, and by the new government, about all this wonderful new volunteerism. This is the last point that I would like to deal with.

They are so impressed, so impressed with the fact that a Great West Life employee has come on a paid leave of absence to do research for the Conservatives. And the minister from River Heights, he says that "We hope to draw many people from outside government to assist us on the Task Force.

We hope these people will work on a volunteer basis or for a very nominal fee." And then they get all these wonderful headlines - "Few on Task Force Will Get Government Pay." Boy, there's the Tories, you know, saving money, helping the taxpayer along -you know, a paperclip here, a paperclip there, a dollar saved, a dollar earn ed, the whole thing - "Great West Paying P.C. Adviser's Salary, Volunteerism Defended". Yes, sir, we want volunteers from business, and they welcome - the Conservative leaders say they welcome this volunteer input from the private sector.

And the member for River Heights said he didn't know anything about the pay arrangements. You know, he just assumed - like, he never thought about it, you know, he's a fairly wealthy man - just never realized that somebody had to have a paid salary- just sort of thought a fellow dropped in one afternoon and said, "Do you mind if I work for you?" and he said he doesn't know how the guy gets paid - it doesn't really interest him - he's a volunteer. So, you know, you don't ask questions, right? Someone says, "Can I come and work for you? Can I help you out?", you takehim on, right? Well, Mr.

Speaker, here is the Great West Life Corporation, and I say that with the best of intentions- with the best of intentions - they have a corporate philosophy, they have a philosophy that reflects the insurance industry or lobby of Canada, and they either do, or can do, business with the government. And I think that one should be rather cautious or hesitant about having direct involvement from them or from other similar corporatio ns in Manitoba. Let me give you a couple of examples of why I would be particularly cautious in regud to them.

I do not put them down as the worst example - I just say they are an example, an example of the business sector. It is possible that in the next few years the Manitoba government will buy their land and their building. Well, it wouldn't be good, it wouldn't be good to have one's thinking coloured by friendly associations when one is dealing in matters of price and purchase. Mr. Speaker, what would their attitude be towards something like Autopac?

Well, they're not in the car insurance business, but I could well imagine that they would be very negative on the provincial Autopac scheme and would advise, directly or indirectly, to dismantle or alter. We know what their posture was on sickness and accident insurance. They made public statements. They said: We're against this; it's not necessary. They fought in the press and perhaps behind the scenes against the implementation of sickness and accident insurance. A lot of work was done on that. Maybe the new government would implement it if they studied it objectively. But I say, Mr.

Speaker, given the way they are operating, there's no way you'll ever see this government get involved into any extention of an insurance program. Going back ten years, 12 and 15 years, the former President of Great West Life, David Kilgour, deceased, he led the fight in Canada against hospitalization and against medicare, and he also led the fight in Canada against the Canada Pension Plan. So there is the sum of the public views that we are aware of that come from across the street on matters of public policy.

And we know, we don't even have to be told this, but it's all documented, I can read you the articles from February '66 but I don't think I have time or voice to do that. So they think it's going to be something for nothing. Well, you know, Mr. Speaker, that's pretty naive, pretty naive. Everything for nothing. Everything for nothing. Mr. Speaker, when we bring in the mining interests and the insurance interests and the business interests, we know what they're going to say. It's not going to surprise anybody. They will say what they think is in their best interests and I say Mr.

Speaker, that the best interests of Manitoba are not identical with the best interests of business in Manitoba. It used to be said years ago that what's good for General Motors is good for the United States. That's the way some of these people think. It just isn't true. There's a conflict and I think that that will be one of our goals in this brief session and in the 49

Monday, November 28, 1977 years ahead, to make that kind of comparison. I heard on the radio the other day about a recent speech in Winnipeg. Someone was encouragi ng businessmen to become more active and more involved in politics. I found that kind of peculiar, Mr. Speaker, because for about a hun dred years, in Manitoba, and a hundred years nationally, I think the business sector had its way. And it's only really in the last eight years in this province I think, that we were not calling upon these people from the community in the manner in which they were called upon before.

They were just treated as another group. They weren't treated as the group that commands and has a hold on all wisdom in society. So why are they doing this? Why are these people doing this? Well, I say it's a good investment, it's a good in vestment, pays dividends. If you run an insurance company or a mining company or a private enterprise company, you know what that's all about, it's dayto-da business. Invest money here, and take out a dividend there. Well, Mr. Speaker, I say that these free volunteers, this concept should be stopped at onc e. It should be termin ated immediately.

They say in the Bible a man can not serve two masters, can not serve God and mammon, and that is the conflict. The recommendations, I thi nk, are predictable. We knew a few years ago when the ICEC in Winn ipeg was going to commission the Erwood Currie Report about the City of Winnipeg works and operatio ns, their Public Works Department. We knew what their recommendations would be. We didn't have to read their report. We predicted the report.

The teport was that they should dismantle the ent ire Department of Public Works and that they should in effect contract it out to private business and similarly we know what will come out of this task force. Are they naive about this, Mr. Speaker, just plain stupid - no. They know what they're doing. They know whom they represe nt and they know why they represent them. We know who bankrolled the Premier when he was Leader of the Opposition. We know who bankrolled the Conservative party and now it's time to collect. Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues I want to reassure the people of this Province on two points: (1 )We will provide a vigorous official opposition and keep this governm ent on its toes.

(2) We will work night and day to ensure that the social and economic gains, made during our eight years in office, are neither lost nor compromised. MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Memb er for Pembina and the proposed amendment of the Honourable Leader of the Oppositio n, the Honourable Member for The Pas. MR. McBRYDE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to first of all congratulate you on your position as Speaker of the House and I would also like to thank the people of The Pas Constituency for sending me back to the legislature with a good majority.

I am pleased to be here because I think it will be part of a second historical occasion. When the New Democratic Party was elected in 19 69 1 think people in all parts of Canada looked and saw that there was a progressive and dynamic government, a people oriented governme nt and the most progressive and dynamic government, I think, that Manitoba has ever seen. This was able to be done, Mr. Speaker, without increases out of line with other provinces in terms of expenditures, without increases out of line with other provinces in terms of the number of civil servants.

In fact, if you look at the facts and figures and not just listen to the members who used to be opposite, and still are but in a different capacity, the records clearly show that there was nothing untoward. As a matter of fact Mani toba was one of the lowest in terms of per capita expenditure, civil servants. In effect, ran a pretty sound ship at the same time providing a progressive government in the province of Manitoba. But now, Mr. Speaker, we are in 1977, we have a new government but as I said I feel the good fortune of being here when history is being made once again. Mr.

Speaker, I do believe that this new government will go down in history books, will go down in history, not onl y of Manitoba but the history of Canada. -) I nterjection)- Yes, Mr. Speaker, even the Min ister without portfolio number three, and the members opposite will go down in history as part of this Conservative Government in the province of Manitoba. And the reason, Mr. Speaker, that they will go down in history, they will go down in history as the government that has been a part of the highest unemployment and the highest welfare payments ever existing in Canada since the days of the depression.

When students pick up their text book in History 101, they'll open it and they'll see R.B. Bennett, Sterling Rufus Lyon, the people in charge of government at the time of the highest unemployment rates and the highest welfare rates. Mr. Speaker, I have a bad habit of clipping things out of newspapers. I didn't used to have time for it but I have developed this habit in the last month or so. -(Interjec tion) - Mr. Speaker, I see that the disease has spread rather quickly. The members opposite having to deny only two today and a few on Friday, what was reported in the newspapers.

But this habit of mine makes it a little bit easier to follow along the progress of the new government to see how this government is in fact performing for the people of Manitoba. Because, Mr. Speaker, we talk about a couple of things. They talked campaign that there is going to be a change for the better and they talked about, during the election campaign, that somehow there was going to be a magic business climate. I'm not sure how you would exactly define this but there was going to be a business climate created in the province of Manitoba. So, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to just look at some of these clippings here and see how this change for the better and how this business climate is coming along if I can find the

section that I'm ieviewing. Here's another section, Harry L. Marden Picks Cabinet. This isn't the one I wanted, Mr. Speaker, but this is 50

Monday, November 28, 19 77 quite interesting. "M inister of Municipal Affairs, Warren Steen for Crescentwood; Minister of Highways, Dave Blake for Minnedosa; Minister of Labour, George Minaker for St. James; Employment and Youth Service, Len Domino for St. Matthews; Corrections, Henry Einarson for Rock Lake. Well obviously, Mr. Speaker, the First Minister takes my advice as well as he takes Harry Mardon's advice as who he should put in his cabinet. But wha t I was looking for Mr.

Speaker, is some of the anouncements in the newspaper that reflect the cha nge for the better that we now have in the province of Mani toba, the business climate that we now have in Manitoba. And let's see, the first one I come to is, oh yes, on October 21 "I nco announces layoff of 650 people in Manitoba." That doesn't cout, wha t they laid off in Ontario. It's kind of funny, Mr.

Speaker, the new Minister of Labour says well the reason for this layoff in Manitoba was because of the government- not realizing, of course, that she was even saying more against her colleagues in the province of Ontario where they have a Conservative Government where over two thou sand people were lai off in that particular province. Mr. Speaker, this is one of the cha nges for the better, Inca - 650 people. Let's see - cha nge for the better - real estate firm closes its door and lay off 85 people from its payroll. That's a cha nge for the better.

Th at's the new business climate within the province of Manitoba. There's another interesting one here, Mr. Speaker, it says that the Premier says that people are walking with a lighter step on Portage Avenue. They are walking with a lighter step and that's the new business climate that's been created. "I've been told that the re's an extra spring in the step of people as they walk down Portage Avenue, he said during a news conference." Mr.

Speaker, I think that there are a few people walking with a lighter step in Manitoba now bu it has been suggested that maybe the reason they're walking with a lighter step now is because their wallets are empty so they are able to walk with a lighter step as they go down Portage Avenue. What else does it say here in the clippings, Mr. Speaker, about the cha nge for the better that we now have in the province of Manitoba? "Manitoba Hydro postpones construction plans in northern Manitoba." Mr. Speaker, this particular announcement does not say how many people are affected.

My estimate would be that there are probably well over 1, 000 people that are affected by the slowdown in construction in Northern Manitoba at the Hydro sites. It has been suggested tha t maybe the people that are laid off by INCO could in fact get employment with Manitoba Hydro, but of course that option is now ruled out and as the present First Minister of Manitoba says, "Well, they can get unemployment insurance ," because tha t's his solution to the problem - well, they can get unemployment insurance. As they go down the list, Mr.

Speaker, on Friday, November 4th, "Seagram puts cork on Gimli industry." Again, Mr. Speaker' another change for the better and another reason why this present government will go down in history as the unemployment and welfare government of Manitoba. Of course, on the same page it does mention tha t the PCs hire Jarvis at $35,000 a year. Well, I won't comment on that one, Mr. Speaker.

As we move along thr ough the cha nge for the better we come across the construction industry which my colleague, the member for Elmwood has pointed out, where there is a loss of anywhere from 900 to 1 ,400 jobs alone within the city area of Winnipeg, 900to 1,400 jobs righ t here in the City of Winnipeg - another ch ange for the better.

The next clipping we come across is the end of the Job Creation Program because as the First Minister feels that, in fact, people shouldn't be assisted in difficult times th rough a job creation program even th ough the business community was satisfied with some aspects of the program, that government shouldn't assist with that kind of program because in fact they can get unemployment insurance from the federal government. The next clipping, as we move along, Mr. Speaker, relates to the jobless in Minnedosa and, Mr.

Speaker, I think there is a number in that particular area, 180 jobs that have been_ lost in that community. . So we keep moving along and we progress in date here and this is one, Mr.Speaker, that we talked about very briefly during the session already, "Flyer closure looms as bus bids rejected" and the number of people affected by that change for the better in the province of Manitoba, the number there is 300 workers that are affected. That clipping is on November 26th. We keep moving along. Versatile - 180 people laid off at Versatile Manufacturing.

Dominion Bridge -"Al Francis, president of Dominion Bridge Company Limited predicted possible layoffs later this winter". So we don't have a number on those, Mr. Speaker. So what we are going to have here is the highest welfare rate and the highest unemployment rate under a Conservative government tha t Manitoba has ever seen. I think, Mr. Speaker, you probably saw those ads that were on TV some time before the election. There was a bird th ere and somebody says, "Let's free enterprise" and they throw the bird up and it flies nicely away. I think that we can use that example.

We can cha nge the bird a little bit, I suppose, and put unemployment figures on it. Let's free enterprise - Inca 650 jobs, they fly away. Let's free enterprise - Real Estate firm closes - 85 jobs fly away. Let's postpone hydro construction; let's change thi ngs for the better. One thousand jobs fly away. A MEMBER: Who postponed that? MR. MCBRYDE: Let's allow layoffs to occur in the construction industry. Let's free enterprise- let them fly away. 51

Monday, November 28, 19 77 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Riel. MR. CRAIK: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, the member is suggesting here that it was this gover nment that postponed Hydro. He might like to correct the record and indicate that it was the former government that postponed Hydro and I presume he is referring to Limestone. MR. MCBRYDE: I'm glad to be able to clarify the situation in Man itoba. The situation in Manitoba, Mr.

Speaker, is that the provincial government in the province of Man itoba was responsible for everything that happened in the province of Man itoba until October 11, 1977. Before October 11t h, the provincial government was to blame for everything that happened. I had a campaigner in my constituency, Mr. Speaker, and his tactic was as follows: He would go to somebody, "Is there anything you don't like; is there anything you're un happy with?" "Oh, yes, I'm unh appy with somethi ng." "Ah, that's the NDP's fault. If you vote Conservative, then you won't have to be unh appy any more." MR.

CRAIK: Well it worked, didn't it? MR. MCBRYDE: It worked quite well but before October 11 th everything was the fault of the provincial government. MR. CRAIK: Good advice. A MEMBER: Even the weather. MR. MCBRYDE: After October 11 th, nothing is the fault of the government; nothing is the fault of the provincial government. It's very very strange. MR. CRAIK: On a point of privilege, I want to straighten out the ... MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Min ister of Finance on a point of privilege. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the member will not, for the purposee of the record, straighten out his earlier comment that it was this government, the present government , that can celled the Hydro and I presume he referred to Limestone. Would he not, for the record, indicate for the record that it was the former government that had taken that move? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I fail to find that a point of privilege, Mr. Min ister. The Honourable Member for The Pas. MR. MCBRYDE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the member were a little quicker he might have seen one of the other examples I used that actually the layoffs took place before but we never campaigne d and went to those areas and said, "When we are elected, you will be back at work. When we are elected, there will be change in the business climate. When we are elected, there will be jobs available for you." We never went and campaigned on that basis, Mr. Speaker. The members opposite did that. Let's see, I was busy freeing enterprise when I was interrupted by the hon ourable member. Let's see, the Hydro postponement, oh yes, over 1,0 00 jobs flying away.

Good bye jobs, Man itoba. Seagrams In dustry jobs - let's free en terprise - there goes some more jobs flying away. The job creation program - change things for the better - jobs flying away. Dominion Bridge - let's free enterprise - jobs flying away. Versatile Manu facturing - let's free ent erprise - jobs flying away. CCIL, Co-op Implements - let's change things for the better, let's free enterprise- jobs flying away. Mr.

Speaker, that's why I stand before you and say, this gover nment here is going to be recognized in history; it's going to go down in history and all the members are going to go down in history as the government causing the highest une mployme nt and having the highest welfare rates in this province that we've ever seen before. Now, Mr.

Speaker, this problem, this new government with what they call their protracted restraint program, is going to affect the remote northern communities even much more seriously than the province as a whole and we have already seen that the province as a whole is going to be in pretty tough shape, is in pretty tough shape under this government.

I think that the problem is a fairly complex one in Northern Manitoba and I will apologize to some people who have heard me talk about Northern Mani toba and the economic development in remote communities but there are a few new members across and a few new members who might like to hear about the situation in Northern Man itoba because there was in the past, Mr. Speaker, a pretty high unemployment rate in remote Northern Man itoba. There was a pretty high welfare rate in remote Northern Man itoba.

There were pretty high rates of other things that are related to the fact that people don't have a chance to work, that people don't have the opportunity to be productive. Now, this wasn't completely solved, Mr. Speaker, but starts were made and a number of very worthwhile projects, programs, economic developments were taking place in the northern remote communities. BPeople began to have some 52

Monday, November 28, 19 77 pride in themselves and be able to See that in fact they could solve some of the problems with some as istance, some advice from government but basically themselves that they could deal with the problems that they faced.

Although there is no magic answer, we looked at a social cost benefit analysis, a way to figure out the real costs of having people unemployed, the real cost of assisting them in their economic development so the members, I think, the new members can understand that if you look at the welfare payments you would have to pay if somebody is not working, if you look at the fact that if they are working they contribute to income taxes, you can figure out how much it cost the province in some of these communities to have people unemployed as opposed to having them employed.

I am sure some of the new members, the member for Swan River and some of the others will have communities like this within their constituencies and will understand this problem that they are now facing as the government of the province of Manitoba. So what happens when people are forced to be unemployed for a long period of time even though the First Minister says, "Well, let them get unemployment insurance." That's his attitude, well, let them get unemployment insurance; that will come out of the federal government and it will make us look good here in Manitoba even though these people aren't working.

But there are other costs too that I don't think he took into consideration when making that callous comment. The welfare rates of course will go up and they will go up quite drastically. The cost of policing, because when people don't have work lots of other things start happening in the community. When people don't have work, the police costs go up because it costs a lot more to deal with that community.The health costs go up in that community; the court costs go up; th e auto accidents go up, j ust about everything related to how that community functions.

If people don't have a chance to be productive, to earn a living, to feed their families, then the social destruction starts and the member for Swan River could see it in some areas of his constituency, the member for Dauphin can see it without driving too far, the kind of problems that develop when people don't have that chance to be productively employed. There's a lot more that has to be done to deal with this problem than say, "Let them collect unemployment insurance ." We have already seen, we have already begun to see the approach of this government in dealing with this problem.

The Communities Economic Development Fund has been cut off; the winter roads program has been drastically changed and it's related to the CEDF, to the Development Fund being cut off. So what happened, what happened in the past, Mr. Speaker, in order to deal with this problem of unemployment? In the past there were Winter roads to be built in remote communities and away back before 1969 those roads were put in using southern contractors . In more recent years every attempt has been made to employ the local people in those communities in that construction work and this Was done in a number of ways. 1.

By contracting with the people in those communities to do the work. In some cases the management ski I Is were not there or the finances Were not there for them to do it themselves and therefore contractors with proven performance in terms of hiring local people were given some preference in the awarding contract, or the Depar tment of Northern Affairs itself carried out that contract, hiring local foremen, hiring the local people to do that work, hiring the local equipment to do that work.

I think it is important that the new members understand that if that approach is not used, then there are going to be a lot of people out of work in those communities and the result as I said is going to be welfare costs going up and all the other costs related to that community increasing quite dramatically. The methods besides making sure that the local people took advantage of the contracts that were going in there was to assist them with a mixture of methods and I think that during the last session we could see quite clearly the distinction between the two political parties.

The New Democratic Party saying that whatever method of economic development is going to work in those communities that is the method we are willing to assist them to use to develop their community. We were not rigid in what method, but whatever method was going to work in those communities. The position of the Conservative Party and of the Liberal Party was that there is only one method, there is only one economic development tool we can use in those communities and that is the free enterprise method. Now what does that no rmally mean, Mr. Speaker?

It no rmally means that somebody comes in from outside and does the work in that community. Somebody comes in from outside and takes advantage of the development opportunity in that community. But, Mr. Speaker, we would have nothing against that method if it was going to work in that community and in some communities the method did work.

There are a number of tourist operators developing, there are a number of people who have gone into service industry such as stores and other service industries, there are private ent repreneu rs in these communities who live in that community, who have an investment in that community, and who want to make that community develop and grow. They are not people who come in, take out what they can and leave again. There are other methods too that we have used. We have used the Co-op method. We have used community companies or a band council company.

We have used the small Crown corporations and the number of jobs created for a reasonable investment by the people of Manitoba, an investment that is offset by savings and welfare, an investment that is offset by income tax paid by peop !e, an investment that is offset by keeping down the other costs of social disruption that you face in the remote communities are there. For example there is the Easterville Harvesting and again we see this gove rnment's attitude - that operation is now being phased down, people are being laid off in a community, Mr.

Speaker, that is faced with a fishing layoff because of the problems caused by the Hydro development at Gr and Rapids affecting the fish in that community. The fish were not pu rchased in the fall fishing season and there is still question whether there will be fish during the winter fishing season which means, Mr. Speaker, that sixty to eighty people are laid off the from the 53

Monday, November 28, 19 77 fishery. At the same time the government comes in for failure to invest some money to carry over inven tory in the Easterville Harvesting and al lows that operation to close down.

The other kinds of operations that exist are Moose Lake Loggers, Channel Area Loggers, both of these operations - as a matter of fact Moose Lake Loggers started out as a training program in 1968- 69 when the present Minis ter of Highways had something to do with natural resources and the training program was turned into a small Crown corporation that has provided up to sixty jobs in the community of Moose Lake for residents of that area. What is going to happen when those jobs are lost if this government sees fit to let that project die? What is going to happen to sixty people in that community?

How many people do those sixty people that are employed feed and look after? How many families are going to be affected if they allow that kind of development to die.

There are a number of other community-based projects that if the new governme nt in its program of protracted restraint, acute protracted restraint, is going to allow them to die, is going to not int erim finance, is going to not in a few cases provide some subsidy to keep peop le off welfare, there are a number of these programs in so many northern communities that if they allow this to take place they are going to be in the long-run costing themselves more mone y.

They will look good politically, they will say, well we cut this, we cut that, it looks good, but their expenditures will have to be added on somewhere else. Their welfa re expenditures, their court and their police expenditures, etc., etc. , will have to be added on somewhere else. Maybe I'll give the members an example, the new members. There is a community of Pukatawagan which is in the northern end of the Flin Flon cons tituency.

That community had two students in it a couple of summers ago from the summer student empl oyment program, and they assisted them to organize recreation in the community of Pukatawagan. During the three months that the students were there, and the salaries in that particular program are very smal l, Mr. Speaker, very low salaries, the cost of these two people for those three months there was zero court cases in that community, zero court cases in the community of Pukatawagan. In September, October, and November there were seventy court cases after those people had left.

The cost of those seventy court cases -a nd I don't know if the members understand the situation in the north-w hen there is a court case the police party has to go in. The police have to go in and deal with that community, they have to go back in as part of the court party, there is a judge or a magistrate, there is the police, there is a defence lawyer, there is a prosecution lawyer, there is a probation officer - one trip, one court case. In the community of Pukatawagan it would pay to have recreation people there.

This is the kind of cost benefit you have to look at, because the way the evidence suggests so far that members opposite will be dealing with this problem will be to al low the unemployment to develop, will be to take the short sight or the short answer or the short-sighted answer and not think of the long-term in those communities. So there are very many projects within the remote communities that will be affected by the kind of acute protracted restraint that if this gover nment fol lows they will be doing it for pol itical purposes and not for practica l, economic, public administrative purposes.

There is the Jen peg logging operation which provides employme nt to the people in Cross Lake and Wabowden. There is a new sawmill operation in the community of Cross Lake which employs a number of people from that community of Cross Lake. There is a prefab housi ng plant at the community of Churchill which provides employment in that community. In each community they have been assisted or are in the process of being assisted to develop jobs, to develop economic development opportunities.

If those are lost, the problems for those remote communities will be serious and the problems for this government in increased expen ditures will be serious. If you combine that with all the unemployment, all the layoffs, all the cl ose-downs that I ran over at the start of my remarks, Mr. Speaker, we are going to see this welfare government and this unemp loyment government in the most serious situation that the Province of Manitoba has ever been in.

With these serious problems facing the peop le of Manitoba, with these serious problems facing this new government in Manitoba, what do we get in the Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker? What do we have to say about this serious problem, the un employment problem, and the welfare problem that is developing in the Province of Man itoba? What do we say- it is under review? No, we say that there is going to be a tax reduction that is going to benefit about four percent of the people of Manitoba. That is the answer, a tax reduction that is going to affect the people w don't really need a tax deduction.

That is their answer to the serious probl ems that are facing us. What else is a priority for the new government? They are going to eliminate the time and three quarter provision of the overtime legisla tion. The legislation that was designed to deal with the problem that employers were in fact hiring people on overtime instead of hiring new people from the work force.

When you look at the figures, when you look at the details of the assistance given for the other part of the wage package, for the fringe benefits in the wage package, and then when you apply that to overtime, overtime in Manitoba is not now time and on e-half. It is probably less than time and one-quarter, because the fringe benefits are not incl uded in that overtime payment.

So why should I as an employer go out and hire some new people, put some new people to work, when I can work my present people overtime and lots of overtime with almost no cost or maybe even less cost than bringing somebody new in and having to give them the fringe ben efits when they work on a forty hour week. So that's the priority of this government, to take legislative action to revoke legislation that is going to increase unemployment, but that fits, it fits in what is happening in the Province of Manitoba.

That's another reason why all members opposite are going to go down in history as the part of the government that caused the highest unemployment this province has ever seen since the depression days. 54

Monday, November 28, 19 77 They have some other priorities that seem to be very important to them in the light of all these serious problems, in the light of the unemployment and the welfare increases that are going to take place. They want to eliminate legislation that brings forward the equality of the marriage situation.

So that is their priority - tax relief for the well-to-do, a few of their friends; legislation that I would call real time and one-half legislati on, that makes time and one-half in fact time and one-half, revoking that leg islatio; and revoking legislation that brings out the equality in the marriage situation. That is their priorities. The members opposite talked about priorities quite a bit during the session of the legislature. But what am I supposed to do, . what am I supposed to do when I go back to my constituency and somebody says I'm out of work, I don't have a job any more.

What are you going to do about it, you are my elected represe ntative? What are the members opposite going to do when they go back into their constituency? What is the Member for Dauphin going to do? What is the Member for St. James going to do when he goes back into his constituency and people come and say, "I'm unemployed, there is no work available." Go on unemployment insurance, that is what he is going to be able to say, as his Leader said, go on unemployment insurance. That is the only ans wer he is going to give. Or he could give another answer and I would like to hear the reply.

He can say, "Well look, look, you know it is too bad you are out of a job but heck we had to give tax relief to those four percent of the population of Manitoba that are going to benefit, we had to give tax relief for them. We had to revoke the overtime, the time and three-quarters, it is really time and one-half legislation, we had to do that. Don't you think that is important. I mean what are you worried about, all you don't have is a job. We had to do these priorities of our governme nt." And that is what the members opposite are going to be able to say when they go back and talk to their constituents. Mr.

Speaker, I wouldn't like to hear the answers they are going to get from their constituents when they say, "Go on unemployment insurance." Or what about these priorities giving tax relief for the well-to-d o. I would really like to hear the answers that they are going to get from their own constituents when they do that. So, Mr. Speaker, I am not optimistic about what is happening in Manitoba. I am not optimistic about what is going to happen in Manitoba. I don't really like to be a part of a historical event that is going to cause so much hardship and so much suffering to the people of Manitoba.

I don't like to be part of a legislature when the government in office is part of causing the highest unemployment and the highest welfare rates we have ever seen in Manitoba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Public Works. MR. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I choose to rise just for a few moments at this time to at least put a few things on the record, particularly as it pertains to the conduct of the honourable members on this side of the House during this session, this uncalled for session, which I might add to my ho nourable friend the Member for The Pas. But, before doing so, Mr.

Speaker, let me hasten to assure you, and as is custom of my utter and complete subservience, Sir, to your dictums as you will find it necessary to lay down from time to time to all members, I know that it's hardly necessary for me to say that you need only ask the former Speaker as to how quickly I acquiesced on all occasions to whatever admonitions came from the Chair from time to time in terms of the conduct that was called for in this House. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate honourable members opposite.

I must say that they look, by and large, considerably happier on that side of the House than when last I saw them on this side of the House. Whether or not they have a natural bent for the opposition, I'll leave future electors of Manitoba decide but I'm satisfied that they came to that same conclusion on October llth and have accommodated honourable members by moving them to the other side of the House. Mr.

Speaker, let me also indicate to members present on both sides of the House, particularly the new members - I congratulate them on their respective electoral victories -I'll look forward to working with them in the House - but, Mr. Speaker, really, let me simply remind all members opposite why we're here at this particular time. I indicated right at the outset that it was a session not of our calling, not of our choosing, at this particular time.

We're here simply to do one thing, which is to clean up the unfinished business of the former governme nt- which is simply to clean up what the political posturing of the former Premier of this province didn't allow him to do properly - and that is the AIB legislation. And that's the only reason why we're here.

We would have been quite content, to use that phrase that now has already been drawn to our atten tion, to hold for pending review other matters that we have chosen to raise during this short session, whether it is some of the reductions of taxes, whether it is some of the changes in some of your legislation, that those changes have only been made possible because of the basic and only real reason why we're here, and that is to do something that the former Premier, the present leader of the New Democratic Party, was politically not capable of doing, and I describe it in the following way, Mr. Speaker.

He was politically astute and conscious en ough to posture throughout the width and breadth of this country, indeed, even ally himself with my former national leader, Mr. Stanf ield, when first the words "controls" were broached in Cana da. And we all remember that, we all remember that.

The former premier of this province was among the foremost premiers, public people in Canada that supported a position that was not popular ly held by his own coll eagues in his own party and certainly not popularly held by organized labour, that is one of the necessity of this nation going through a period of cont rols on wages and prices. However, the former First Minister saw that as a proper role, and I believe most of us on that 55

Monday, November 28, 19 77 side of the House at that time, many Manitobans, many Canadians accepted that as being a proper, statesmanlike role, if I might say, for the First Minister of the Province of Manitoba at that time to take. Mr. Speaker, he also had the advice, which we are now privy to, that the proper way to proceed in this particular area was through legislation. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the very legislation that we are introducing in this Chamber, that has been introduced in this Chamber first reading, this legislation was drawn up for him, not for us.

It was drawn up for that party, for that government, not for us. However, that did present a problem, Mr. Speaker, to the former New Democratic Party government. It meant that that legislation would have been brought into this Chamber. That meant that it would have been debated on the floor of this Chamber. That would have meant and invited a possible division that has from time to time occurred when the honourable members opposite formed government, particularly on a matter that involved the approach and the relationship with organized labour in this province.

And the First Minister was out of step to some extent with organized labour on this particular question, and so he chose politically not to allow that situation to happen for a- what . He opted instead is now proven by a Supreme Court rul ing - an unwise course of solving his problem by the route of order in council, by Executive Coun cil action in his Cabinet. Well, the Honoura ble Leader of the Opposition indicates that the decision was five-four, but be that as it may, the decision was reversed .

The opportunity to argue that case really isn't with us, and we are now bringing in legislation to correct that action MR. SPEAKER: Order, Please. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the honourable member would permit a question. He obviously woul dn't recognize me in my seat- that's quite correct, even though I sometimes offer him that lux ury.

Can you tell me what prompted Bill Davis - I'm sure the honourable member knows the name - the Prime Minister, I believe they call him over there - of the largest, wealthiest, and probably have the most expensive lawyers in Canada decided to proceed not by legislation until after a court decision? MR. ENNS: The immediate thought comes to me, Mr.

Speaker, that the reason might have something to do with the fact that he at that time was a leader of a minority government, facing a vociferous N DP opposition in Ontario, and took the same course of action that the former government did by avoiding the kind of public debate that, in my judgement, was necessary. However, the difference is this, that the Ontario House sits all the time and it did not necessitate a special session being called, which we are doing right now, Sir, which we are doing right now, Sir. Now, Mr.

Speaker, my purpose of rising was only to remind all of us, and to remind members of the fourth estate that it's not our intention, altho ugh it's certainly no intention of our part to thwart the kind of normal and traditional debate on the Throne Speech, but it is not our intention to argue point by point or to face speaker after speaker as honourable members opposite rise in this Throne Speech debate.

We are at this time experiencing a situation that hasn't happened all too often in Manitoba of late, where a new government walks in in late October, having to familiarize ourselves with your estimates, honourable gentlemen opposite, and having to sort out, and yes, and review and review and review the many programs, some ill-conceived, some well-conceived, but nonetheless - make no mistake about it - programs that will fit our priority of things, because we believe that that mandate was made very clear by the people of Manitoba on October !Ith, and for that reason, I do not want to leave the impression, Mr.

Speaker, to you, Sir, or indeed to members of the fourth estate tha t any relu ctance on the part of government members to participate perhaps as fully as you would expect under more normal circumstances in the debates during this short session that that indeed is the reason, that we will have time, honourable gentlemen opposite, to debate who has the primary responsibility in our society for We have to martial our arguments as to the correctness about the way in which we set priorities as we go about governing the affairs of this province. We look forward to having that time at the next regular session.

Our job right now, Mr. Speaker, is to get through with the business of this session, clean up the errors or the lack of action that was taken by the previous administration on the AIB legislation, and let me simply say that that is the only reason for this session being called. That is the only reason for this session being called.

Set aside Marital Property Act, set aside tax reductions, set aside any other matters, but, Sir, having been called upon as a result of your action in assembly, having gone through the expend itures of doing same, then, Sir, certainly you would expect only understandable from our point of vie /w, that those measures, those particular election promises that can be implemented, and can be implemented as soon as possible, oughtto be done by a government that will keep its election promises.

To suggest that the particular measures before you in this session weren't clearly stated, weren't clearly advertised on all our literature as things that will and shall and can and ought to be done and hopefully in a week's time we can say have been done, that's simply carrying out the mandate that the people of Manitoba gave us on October !Ith. And that's the reason why we're in this Chamber, Mr. Speaker, and that's the only reason why we're in this chamber. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for ln kster. 56

Monday, November 28, 19 77 MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, it's just a questin, I don't want to usurp the floor. I wonder if the honourable member says that the only reason for the session is the anti-inflation legislation and that the other matters can easily wait until a regular session, does the honourable member not think that we could facilitate matters perhaps by this nigh perhaps tonight, on the basis of the fact thatthe other legislation is not necessary. MR. ENNS: That, Mr.

Speaker, as we have experienced over the last eight years and are uncovering every day that we're in office, demonstrates perhaps better than anything else the callo!-ls disregard honourable members have for public money and for taxpayers' money. They are quite prepared to call the whole machinery of session into session, to pass their piece of legislation which was prepared for them, Mr.

Speaker I remind you the AIB legislation that we are presenting we di�f"!'t prepae, it was prepared for the previous First Minister, and failing the political courage to present 1t in the House at the appropriate time two years ago, failing the courage to have cleaned up the matter at that time, we find ourselves with no alternative but to calling this session together. Now, we happen to have a little bit more regard for the use of taxpayers' money, and we happen to have - (I nterjection) - oh yes, oh yes, Mr.

Speaker, that's going to become evident throughout the tenure of this government and throughout the tenure of this administration - and having done that, we have examined those particular programs that we believe commend themselves even to you, honourable gentlemen, because of their imminent common good sense. You know, even on the question matter of - let's take that hoary thing that the members opposite despise so much, the abolition of succession and death duties . . . MR. SPEAKER: The Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: , /Mr.

Speaker, on a point of order ... speech he was asked a question, and that should mean that he should ... with the speech. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Public Works. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I'll facilitate the Honourable Member for St. Boniface. I did not particularly indicate that I had finished my speech. I was deferring, as will be always prone to defer from time to time to the Honourable House Leader on the other side. But I just raise this one point.

Was it not during the last election call, that somewhere I heard the First Minister muttering and musing in public, as he is so often prone to do, about the necessity of abolishing state and succession duty taxes, particularly in view of what was happening around us. I believe, Sir- I don't want to create any misinformation, but it seems to me that those musings were reported by the media at that time. I was a very busy man during the election, as were most of us others, but it seems to me that that was reported. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker and my honourable friend, since he has raised the matter and said in the same breath that he wouldn't like to create misinformation or misimpressions, would he care to allow me to indicate more precisely and that simply, Sir, was to say that I could visualize a future in which, if there were a minority of Canadians in a minority of provinces with the succession duty still in place, that it would be necessary to consider the removal of it, but that's a very important qualification, Mr. Speaker.

The majority of Canadians certainly are still living with the succession duties, which in principle, I believe, all ministers of finance in this province to date, until the very current one, have agreed is more equitable in principle than most taxes. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Highways. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, I believe that the honourable leader of the opposition has demonstrated that we differ only in degree, that the abolition of same could be contemplated even by the members of the Democratic party if the proper conditions prevailed, in the sense that the majority of Canadians found themselves so inclined. I would suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that it is not prophetic vision on my part at all.

It is not prophetic vision on my part at all, but it is a matter of fact that if the electoral body in general in Canada continues in the direction that it demonstrated so capably on October llth, then that will happen far sooner, rather than later, than the honourable member for Rossmere suspects. Mr. Speaker, I've spoken five or ten minutes longer than I intended to speak. I simply wanted to indicate to you, Sir, and to honourable members opposite, that we do not look upon this session in the same light that we would if we were beginning a normal and regular session of the Manitoba Legislature.

We do not intend to respond to the somewhat mild pinpricks that we've been receiving from honourable members opposite to date. We will of course defend ourselves when called upon, but we would look forward to the comments and contributions from honourable members opposite and we'll take them as due notice and hold them under review for such time as is more appropriate for 57

Monday, November 28, 19 77 us to respond in a fuller and perhaps in a more experienced manner on the part of all of us, as we saddle ourselves into the reins of government. MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Member for Pembina and the motion in amendment by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition, the Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would begin my remarks as I bel ieve is customary and also fitting, to congr atulate you on your elevation to this very high position of being Speaker of an Assembly of the legisl ators in the province of Manitoba.

It's always a very difficult job to be an umpire in the effect, to be as impartial as one would like to, it is difficult, but nevertheless it is a chall enge and I know, Sir, that you will live up to that challenge. You do have the advantage of knowing many of the members, which I think is a very important advantage in being able to conduct the business of the House. I too, look forward to continuing to serve along with you, Mr.

Speaker, serve my constituents and serve my province to the best of my ability and I would take this opportunity to welcome all the new members to the legislature and together with them, I'm sure that although we have varying points of view and at times maybe very sharp differences of opinion on policy matters, neverth ele ss, I know all of us, together will attempt to serve our province to the best of our ability.

I consider it an honour and a privilege to continue to serve the constituency of Brandon East, now for the third time round, and I want to observe that I was very pleased to see that I was given a mandate with an even bigger percentage of the popular vote than I've ever received previously. In other words, in spite of a right wing trend in Manitoba, I was pleased to note that my percentage of the popular vote in my riding increased.

I was rather amused the other day when I listened to the two speakers, the mover and seconder of the address to the Speech from the Throne, the member from Pembina, I think it is, then followed by the member from St. Matthews, because you certainly got a contrast in views, a contrast in opinions of what is important and I detected some contrast based on the fact that one represents a very agricultur ally rich area and the other member, the member from St.

Matthews represents an area that essentially has a large percentage of older people, senior citizens, people who are concerned about the continuation of social programs. I only hope that the member from St. Matthews does not become too disill usioned as the months and the years pass by, when he sees before him a cutting back of these very worthwhile social programs. Because, Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in my mind that we are going to see in the lifetime of this government a contraction if not an

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-1-3a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 1st hansardpdf 3a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d20cd2d16c782295e2b9a663a0232f6d7a2a2fda

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