lEGISlATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 Time - 2:00 p.m . OPENI NG PRAYIER by Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER, Hon. Harry lE. Gr aham (Birtle­ Russe ll}: Pr esenting Petitions . . . Read ing and Rec eiving Petitions . . . Pr esenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR . SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Municipal Affairs. HON. DOUG GOURlAY (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the Second Interim Report of the Manitoba Asses sment Review Commit tee dated November 21 , 19 80. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . .

Introduction of Bills. ORAl QUESTIONS MR . SPEAKER: The Honour able Leader of the Opposition. MR. HOWAFID PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. In view of the effects in various ways upon the Pr ovince of Manitoba by way of the closure of the Tribu ne, can the First Min ister advise what was the reason tha t the Gover nment of the Province of Manitoba failed to provide the Kent Commission Inquir y on Newspapers with a submission? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Fi rst Minister. HON . STE RliNG R. lYON (C harleswood ): Mr .

Speaker, the government gave consideration to the question of the Kent Commission and in terms of reference of that commission and decided that on balance, other than restating the problem which was the effect really of most of the submissions that were heard, that there was no need for a formal presentation as such. We did, however, have an informal meeting with the commission by way of a luncheon that was tendered for the th ree commissioners while they were here and had the opportunity for informal discussion with tllem at that time. MR. PAWliEV: Mr.

Speaker, then I ask the First Minis ter , what advantage could there be in an informal kind of mee ting in which various suggest ions were obviously made by the First Min ister. I assu me that wasn't only a luncheon meeting but that suggestions were made, rather than a brie f being subm itted in public , so that all Manitobans would kno w the contents of same and the position adopted by the Government of the Province of Manitoba an open submission. MR. lYO N: Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend is the one who said suggestions were made. I never said they were made at all. MR. PAWlEV : Mr.

Speaker , then the luncheon meeting was even more useless than I might have thought earlier. Can the Min ister of Government Services announce when he, as the Minis ter on behalf of Auto pac, will be announcing the new Autopac rate

schedule for the year 19 81? MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Mi nister of Government Services. HON . HARRY J. EN IIIS (lakeside): Mr. Sp eaker, as a former Chairman of the Manitoba Public Insurance. Corpor ation, the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is well aware that it's at this time of year that the situation is being revi ewed and I'm anticipating recommendations from the Chairman and the Board of Directors of Autopac at any time about any restructuring of the rates in the coming year.

There likely will have to be some increases considered and consider the situation in our other provinc es across Canada , par ticularly in the provinces of British Columbia and Saskatchewan. MR. PAW'lEY: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the days are fast running out prior to which the registration notices, billings, must be forwarded to the motorists of the Province of Manitoba, is the Minis ter ind icating that he has as of this date received no recommendations from the Chair man of the Board of the Ma nitoba Public In suranc e Corporation or no submission as to proposed rate increases? MR . EN III S: Mr .

Speake r, the Leader of the Opposition is fully aware that when an announcement can be.ma de the announcement will be made. In this particular instance he need not remind me of the time tha t the corporation requires to send out the appropriate billings, which I understand come out sometime on or about the middle part of January. MR. PAW'lEY: Mr. Speaker, a final question to the Min ister of Government Services.

In view of the information which has been received of cr iminal charges being laid as against a tow dr iver for Auto Rescue Lim ited along with other various towing companies, in view of the fact that Auto Rescue Lim ited apparently has sole resp onsibility for all towing pertaining to Autopac within the City of Winnipeg, can the Minister advise whether there is any investigation under way or will he be charging anyone with responsibility for an investigation to ensure that Autopac and Autopac's users have not in any way, shape or form been effected by any alleged crimi nal conduct pertai ning to the towing trucks involved?

MR. ENNS: Mr. Sp eaker , I have sufficient confidence that the General Manager, Mr. Dutton, at Autopac would have notified me immediately if there was any reason for the corporation, or indeed for government, to pu rsue any action in this regard. I have received no such notice from Autopac and make the assumption therefore that some of the current problems relative to towing did not occur 93

Wednesday, "17 December, 1980 with respect to the operations of Autopac and/or the towing firm that they do business with. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MlR. SPEAKIEFI: Order please, if I may interrupt, would like to, at this time, introduce to honourable members 12 0 students of Grade 9 standing from the Bruce Ju nior High School, under the direction of Mr. H. Mann. This school is in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Economic Development. We also have 60 students of Gr ade 9 standing from the Westdale Junior High, under the direction of Mr . Will iams.

This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable First Minister. On behalf ol all honourable members we welcome you here this afternoon. The Honourable Member for St. Boniface. ORAl QUESTIONS (Coni'

d) I\III R. i.AURENT J. DES JARDINS (St. IBoniface): Thank you, Mr . Speaker, my question is to the Honourable Minister of Community Services. Can the Minister tell us how many new day care spaces have been approved since September, and how many of those .are presently being operated? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Community Services. HON. GE OR GE I\III INAKER (St . James): Mr. Speaker, I believe there has been a total of in excess of 424 new spaces, a combination of new and after school, as well as home day care spaces have been allotted since September 15 th. MR.

DESJARDINS : I take it then that they are all in operation right now? MR MI NAKER: No. MR. DESJARDINS : Could the Minister tell us, Mr. Speaker, how long does it take to have an application processed for a group day care? MR. MI III AKER: Mr. Speaker, I can't at this time, but I'll get the informa tion for the honour able member. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MRS. JUNE WESTBURY (Fort Rouge): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Honourable First Minister.

Following yesterday's unhappy events a number of people have questioned me regarding a statement that the First Minister made to the effect that the former member for Wolseley would not be receiving any part of his indemnity, and I have been asked to ask the First Minister to confirm that, in view of the fact that the former member for Wolseley and was recognized and was given an opportunity to speak, will he be receiving all or part of his sessional indemnity, or any other allowance? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. I. YOIII: Well, Mr.

Speaker, that is the question that this House will have to decide, but as I indicated 94 last evening, Mr. Speaker, just to make that point clear, that's not something that the Premier turns on or off, it's a decision that is made by this Legislature. For those who were moaning, what I indicated last night, Mr. Speaker, was that the gover nment would be bringing forward legislation for the consideration of the House at this session which would make it impossible for the situation that we saw yesterday to result in the member receiving any emolument or indemnity for his br ief appearance in the House.

I made that quite clear, and I am happy to repeat it today, but that will be a decision - government will bring the bill in - it will be a decision that the House will have to make based on that bill. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MRS. WESTBURV: Yes, Mr. Speaker, my question on another subject is directed to the Honourable Min ister of Education and refers to The Public Schools Act. When will the Minister be bringing the regulations forward, when will they be made public, please, regulations in connection with the new Public Schools Act? I\III R.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Education. HON. KEITH A. COSENS (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to inform the member that those re gulations are available as of today. MRS. WIESTBURY: He didn't give me the question to ask, Mr. Speaker. Referring to

Section 41( 4) of The Public Schools Act, Mr . Speaker, which reads: "Every school board shall provide or make provision for education in Gr ades 1 to 12 inclusive for all resident persons who have the right to attend school", can the Minister tell the House, please, what specific steps are being taken to make sure that this is complied with? I\III R. COS IENS : Mr .

Speaker, I think tha t would probably take a little more time than you would be prepared to give me in this instance, but I can assure the honourable member that there are a number of programs tha t have been initia ted by this government and, of course, supports that have been initiated by this government that will make that quite feasible. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Mem ber for lnkster. MR. SI DNEV GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the First Minister can tell us when he intends to call a by-election for the constituency of Wolseley. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. l VON : Mr.

Speaker, after all of yesterday's discussion, I would have thought that. as we can apprehend it at the present time, there is no vacancy in that seat. !\liFt GREEN: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Prime Minister - I guess I cannot blame him, but I have nobody else to blame - has created the anomalous position of a member, who is not a

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 member, what are the duties of this member and if he has duties and I don't wish to be mistaken, Mr. Speaker, I do not think that he should receive a sessional indemnity because I don't think he is a member? But if the Fi rst Minis ter says he is a member and has obligations to his constituents, can he tell us what he intends to propose about an indemnity for the service that he says that member, who he says is a sitting mem ber and for the constituency for which he will not call a by-election, what does he propose by way of indemnity for this person? MR. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, I think that as and when the government is in a position to bring forward proposed amendments to The Legislative Assembly Act to cover that and other situations relating to that particular point, the situation will become clear.

I point out to him that while it may be perceived by the honourable member as being an anomaly, if my recollection or information is corr ect, the former Member of the House of Commons who was tried and convicted of an indictable offence back in 19 45- 46, Fred Rose, and so far as I am aware did not have any appeal procedures to free him because as I rec all ha beas corpus was susp ende d, hi s seat remained in that position with no member, that is, with him still being the member for the seat but not in the House of Commons for I think the better part of a year or so until, as I am told, the final appeal procedures have been matured, and then the House was in a position to act.

And did act, as I recall, by a motion of the Prime Minister, seconded by the then Minister of Justice, the Right Honourable Mr . St. Laurent, declaring the seat vacant and calling for a by-election after the appeal procedures had been exhausted. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for lnkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I note that that House didn't act until after the appeal procedures had been exhausted . I think that we have somewhat of a different situation in that I believe that Mr. Rose was incar cerated throughout. Mr.

Wilson is not incarcerated, the First Minister says he is a member, and supposed to be doing things, I suppose for his constituents, although, Mr. Speaker, I hasten to again underline I do not think that he is a member, nor do I think that he is. entitled to a legislative indemnity because he is not a member, and that's why I asked that a by-election be called.

But will the Fi rst Min ister tell us, does he propose, because yesterday he seemed to suggest that there would be no indemnity, if this man is a member, he is not incarcerated, ostensibly therefore responsible to his constituents, does the Minister propose that there is going to be some type of re muneration for this obligation? MR. LYON: No, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EV ANS (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of Economic Development.

The company referred to, or known as Pennex Lim ited, publishers of the magazines Enterprise West, Winnipeg Woman, and I believe more than 20 other publications, has now gone into receiver ship. I'd like to ask the Minister whether he or his department were aware that this particular company was experie ncing financial difficulties, and also whether his department offered any technical servi ces, and other type of assistance to this particular firm? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Economic Development. HON. J. FRANK JO HN ST ON (Stu rgeon Cr eek ): Yes, Mr.

Speaker, our department was made aware of the problems of the company that the members suggests or mentions was having. We have been in contact with them. We have offered at any time our staff that's available to assist small business to advise on any type of problems that they may have. We also will make available to them people that are experienced in their busi ness in any way we can to assist them to be successful, unfortunately we weren't able to do that. MR.

EV ANS : Well can the Honourable Min ister advise whether his department is maintaining a file or a list, or some kind of documentation of other companies that may be on the verge of bankruptcy or on the verge of moving out of the province, and whether if such a file exists could he advise us, is it a file perhaps of firms that may be considering closing up within the next three months or the next six months or whatever. MR. JOHN STON: Mr. Speaker, we have no way of knowing, unless they come to us, their thoughts , or we have no way of knowing their problems until they come to us.

Many times when we make, you might say, our regular calls on many companies, we are informed of problems and we are sometimes able to assist them before they become too serious. As regarding a file of people going bankrupt, that is available through my honourable colleagues' offices, the people that have filed bankruptcies. We keep track of those the same way as we keep track of companies tha t are continually opening in the Provi nce of Manitoba, Mr.

Sp eaker; and I might mention one in Stonewall, Bristol Air craft, 4. 5 million investment in the new rocket plant, 69 jobs that we're very proud of, and you know who announced that, Mr. Speaker, it happened to be through a DREE grant, Mr. Sargent, the MP, was very pleased to announce that. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, while we read of some failures and bankruptcies and closures, we don't hear of all of them or at least not all of us hear about them, and I understand the Association of Medical Basics in Selkirk has recently announced the closure with 30 to 35 jobs going down the tube so to speak. MR.

LYON: 30,0 00 new jobs in Manitoba than when you were in, how do you explain them? MR. EVANS : Well, Mr. Speaker, I'll be delighted to explain how Manitoba has dwindled in its share of job creation in this province, this country of ours in 95

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 the last few years, there's no doubt that we have dwindled in the number of jobs created in Manitoba. Mr . Speaker, I'd like to ask the min ister, unfortunately in view of the large number of failures and closures and busine sses moving out of the province, would the Minister consider devising some sort ot early warning system so that he and his depart ment and perhaps his colleagues would have some advance notice of what might be occurring and would be in a better position for ail of us to possibly help these or certainly to help the employees that may be adversely effected? f�R.

JOHNSTO III: Mr. Speaker, the company that he mentions in Selkirk, Manitoba, his own leader and Member for Selkirk was aware of it at least two months ago. I corresponded with him on the subject and brought him up-to-date on all the questions that he asked me about the situation .of that company and its procedures that has been gone through the past two years, and it is ail available. Maybe he should speak to the Honourable Member for Selkirk about it. Mr. Speaker, the main reason for the one in Selkirk, it's unfortunate to have to say, was bad management. MR. EVAIII S: Well, Mr.

Speaker, just to clarify for the honourable minister, the receivership was oniy declared two weeks ago. They may have been considering receivership but it was only declared two weeks ago. ; would ask the minister . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Can we now pro ceed with the qu est ion period . The Honour able Memb er for Brandon East with a question. MR. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate your assistance in this matter.

I would ask the Minister again if he could advise the House whether he and his department would consider setting up some sort of early warning system so that we are better prepared, all of us, collectively, to cope with business failures, bankruptcies and closures in the Province of Manitoba, an early warning system. MR. SPE AKER: Order plea se. The qu est ion is repetitive. MR. EVANS: He didn't answer. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Economic Development. MR. JOHN STON: Mr. Speaker, I guess I'm at a loss to understand what the member means.

If he wants to send me a memo explaining what he really means, does he want us to put an ad in the paper saying, please warn us if you're going broke. What early warning system does he want me to put forward? We have many companies come to our department with problems and when they come to us with problems, or in our regular calls we discover any problems with business, we are only too ready to assist them in every way we can. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Churchill. MR . JAY COW AN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Min ister of Labour, and while we're on the subject of plant closures and businesses going out of business and notwithstanding the humourous remarks by the Minister who had just spoken, I would ask the Minister of Labour if he can indicate to the House if he has been advised of any notices of mass term ination by employers in the province that are currently affective, in other words, he has been advised of the mass terminations under the provisions of the legislation but they have not yet taken place. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON.

KEN MaeMASTIER (Thompson): I'll try to be as correct as possible, Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that we have any notice of any major closures as the member has asked the question. Now, he wandered a little bit in his quest ion, maybe he'd like to rephrase it somewhat. MR. COW AN: Certainly, Mr. Speaker, I will assist the Min ister. Wha t I had asked the Min ister specifically if there has been any notice given under the provisions of the legislation that are currently affective, whether they are foreclosures or mass terminations.

While on my feet, I'd like. to also ask the Minister if he can indicate if there is any formal mechanism that has been set up between his department and the Minister of Economic Development's department so that those ministers are both aware of these notices of mass terminations in a formal way when they are provided to the Minister of Labour. MR. MacMASTER: In answer to the first part of the question, it's "no" to the best of my knowledge. That was first part of the second question. The second part of the second question, the Min ister of Economic Development and myself confer on a regular basis. MR.

CO'WAN: Thank you, Mr . Speaker.

Well 1'1! assume, as the Minister did not indicate that there is a formal process, that there is no formal process and I would ask the Minister of Labour or the Minister responsible for Economic Development, either one, if they can indicate if their respective departments have undertaken a study of the effect of layoffs in the Manitoba economy and I ask the question because the information that we have available is that nearly one-third or approximately one-t hird of those people who are unemployed in the Province of Manitoba today are unemployed because of job loss and ther eby it becomes an extremely sign ificant problem for the government I would ask him what action they are taking in respect to developing strategies and methods to protect the interests of workers and, as well, to protect the interests of Manitoba as a whole in regard to this increasing number of laid off unemployed workers.

MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Speaker, l think that the facts are somewhat fictitious if the member is talking about one- third of those unemployed. If he wishes to supply me with that type of res earched fact ual evidence, I would be very surprised if he could produce such a document, Mr. Speaker. 96 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Elmwood.

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 MR. RUSSEll DOERN: Mr. Speaker. I'd like to dir ect a question to the Minister of Government Services and ask him if he can indicate the cost of the new sound system. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mi nister of Government Services. MR IEN NS : Mr. Speaker, I'd be happy to provide that information, although it might be more suitable to discuss that during the course of my estimates. Mlfl. DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the very poor quality of sound in the Chamber, and the fact that hecklers apparently have equal volume to the person who is offi cially rec ognized , and the fact that earphones and headsets are now required as never before, I wonder whether the Minister will be asking for a refund of any expenditure over 2 cents. MR. IEN NS : Mr. Sp eaker, as with any new introduction ol equipment, there usually is required some time to get some of the bugs ironed out of it.

I must say that the early commenc ement of this session, I don't know who recommended that the session should start on December 11 but that early recommendation put me into a bit of a position here with the sound equipment just barely being in. The staff did not have the time to do the normal testing which they are now doing.

I understand that some of the problems are that the speakers, most of them are up in the public galleries, we'll probably have to bring some of them down on the main floor to help the distribution of sound but I can assure the honourable mem bers opposite that it's in everybody's interest that we get the system worl<ing. When it is working to its lull capacity !'m sure that it will be as good and better than the one that we had.

We have, of course, the extra provision for earplugs for all members now with the new sound system which we didn't have before and also, of course, the provisi on, should it be called upon for instant translation in different languages available to us with the controls that are now attached to each desk. MR. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister to assure us, as he has, that the quality of sound will be improved and I also ask him whether he would attempt to eliminate the need for earplugs other than for members who may be in a particular spot in the Chamber or be hard of hearing.

There should be no reason for a person with normal hearing to be using an earplug or a set of earphones. MIFI. ENNS : Mr. Speaker, I accept and acknowledge that the system is not working to its best. it's been drawn to my attention by you, Sir, Mr. Speaker, and by other members from the very first day that we returned to this Chamber. We will be working on the system to bring it up to the level of service that I think we should expect and deserve in this Chamber. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. HENRY J. IEI NARS ON: Mr .

Speaker, I was going to dir ect this question to the Min ister of Transportation but, in the absence of the Minister, perhaps I could dir ect this to the Min ister of Agriculture. My question relates to the movement of grain to the Port of Churchill.

In view of the fact that we were fortunate in having the MB Arctic load out over a million of bushels of grain this fall after the season closed in the Port of Churchill, I wonder if the Minister of Agriculture has had or will be having any communication with the Canadian Wheat Board as to whether that space can be filled before the ne)(t crop season rolls around in the Por t of Churchill. 97 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Agricultur e. HON. JAMES lE. DOWNIE V (Arth ur): Mr.

Speaker, my concern has been over the past few years more of the lack of movement of grain to Churchill than that that is moved because it seems that yearly or annually we have a difficulty with certain powers that have the authority that haven't been able to fully furnish that port with adequate amounts of grain to fuily utilize the port. We will further be discussing the utilization of the Port of Churchill, that meetings that we plan to have in the near future, and that point that the Mem ber for Rock Lake raises is a very valid one.

I think tha t there is the capability wi thin the system to have that port full of grain during the winter months so that when the navigation does open up, that they can in fact start loading boats at the beginning of the season instead of waiting until the latter part of it. MR. E!NARSON: A second ques tion, Mr. Speaker, which relates to the agreement between the CP and CNR that is rela ted to what is known as "the Churchill hinterland area", the grain area that finds its way to the Port of Churchill.

I wonder if the minister could inform the House whether or not that agreement between the two railroads is going to be maintained for the next crop year. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, at this time I 'm unable to report whether or not tha t interchan MR. EINA RSON: A second question, Mr. Speaker, which relates to the agreement between the CP and CNR that is related to what is known as "the Churchill hinterland area", the grain area that finds its way to the Port of Churchill.

I wonder if the minister could inform the House whether or not that agreement between the two railroads is going to be maintained for the next crop year. MR. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, at this time I'm unable to report whether or not that interchange agreement that was in fact put in place to accommodate Churchill this fall will be continued on with, however, I do believe that the railways that are servicing the Port of Churchill are now finding other products to move into that port and may take some of the load off the backs of the farmers as far as the responsibility of full utiliz.ing of that particular port. MlR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. George. MR. BllUIE URUSKI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I direct this question to the Minister of Agriculture. Yesterday the Minister of Agriculture in reply to my leader's question about the forecast of net realized farm incomes that he gave for Manitoba in October

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 were somewhat different from those that have been publ ished . ls the minis ter now prep ared to acknowledge that those figures that he presented in two releases in October were inaccurate and totally false and misleading to the business community and farmers ot Manitoba? MR. DOWNE V: Well, Mr. Speaker, I responded to that question yesterday.

But as I said yesterday those figures came from the Statistics Canada, those figur es were just merely passed on through our department to the public and, as I indicated, we are reassessing those figures that were given to us and will be making cor rect ions and putting out the information tha t we have further checked and assessed. MR. URUSKI: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister confirm that the figures that he gave out to the public of Manitoba were his own figures and not the figures of Stats Canada with respect to the realized net income.

And if they were not, could the minister indicate which publication did he quote from quoting those 1980 farm income estimates which were out by over 10 0 million, Mr. Speaker. MR. DOW NEY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that it'll be again repetitious. The figures that were used in the releases were Statistics Canada fig ures. The method of calculating the estimate, and they are estimates, Mr. Speaker, they are estimates, the method of calculating those estimates was changed from the year pre vious.

When i have more information on those figures I will release them to the House and to the members; they are somewhat lower but again I will reiterate, they were Statistics Canada figures. 1!\/iR. UFmSKI: Mr. Speaker , could the min ister confirm tha t the latest figur es from Statistics Canada, · which were revised downward from their earlier figures, from 318 · million to 279 which is roughly a 40 million drop, and the figures that the minister used were from 318 million to 410 million which is an increase of roughly 90 million.

Where did he get those figures which were totally misleading and made the impression to the public of Manitoba that agriculture, which in rural Manitoba is in serious trouble and to give the impression that there is no need to bring in any relief to the income situation of Manitoba farmers by the very figures that he has given and mislead all the people of Manitoba? MR. DOWNE Y: Well, Mr. Speaker , again I did indicate to the House that as we had those figures available there will be an explanation ot why and where they came from and on the basis of which they were calcu lated.

But let me just further elaborate, Mr. Speaker, some of the other things that have been said and things that ha ve been done. The assistance programs that have been put in place have been well received by the farm community when it came to transportation pr ograms and pasture programs, greenfeed programs. We've seen some estima ted 50 million to be paid out of Manitoba Crop In surance which is somewhat less than which was initiall y estimated, Mr . Speaker. We've asked for the federal government, who the Minister of the Canadian Wheat Board is one of the pals of the Mem ber for St.

George, to increase the ini tial pr ice of wheat to al leviate some of the difficulties, to give farmers some of their own money. Mr. Speaker, we realize the difficulties that are in rural Manitoba and we are, Mr. Speaker, working towards alleviating some of those problems with programs and with measures that were taken. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKE R: The Honour able Mem ber for Rossmere. 11/iR. VIC SCH ROEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Is it the intention of the govern ment to implement the re commendation of the Ma nitoba Assessment Review Committee that a single assessing authority be established? MR. SPEAKE R: The Honourable Min ister of Municipal Affairs. MR. GOURLAY: Mr. Speaker, ! have just received the second interim report from the Assess ment Review Commission and am currently studying the recommendations that are printed therein and I will be bringing recommendations.Jorward to government in due course. MR. SCH ROE DER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A further question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

I note that on Page 7 of that report it is indicated that only the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce opposed this amalga mation and the committee therefore stated that a single assessing authority would be acceptable to the majority of the ratepa yers in Manitoba. Has he made the committee aware of the fact that Winnipeg does contain the majority of the ratepayers in Manitoba? MR. GOURLA Y: Well, Mr. Speaker, as I indicated I am currently looking at the recommendations printed therein and will be studying it MR. SC HROEDE R: Thank you, Mr. Sp eaker.

A question to the Minister of Economic Development Recently, I'm sure he's seen the ads in the papers by the Federal Business Development Bank indicating that bankruptcies, business fai lures in Manitoba are up by 65 percent and I'm .iust wondering whether his department co-operated with FBDB in preparing those ads and whether he has any comments on them? MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable M in ister of Economic Development. MR. JOHNS TON: Well, Mr. Speaker, the percentage it went up in 19 77 was 11 5 percent and, Mr . Speaker, it went from 53 to 11 4, and we've gone from 97, 90 to 13 7, Mr. Speaker, are the figures.

If the honourable members wish to exam ine more closely those figures they'll find that Manitoba is 4.5 percent of the population of Canada and we're only 2.2 as far as bankru ptcies are concerned. We're better as far as our population is concerned. When you take it in the 10,000 businesses in Manitoba versus per 10,0 00 businesses in other provinces we stand fifth across Canada, we're right in the middle 98

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 across Canada regarding bankruptcies, Mr. Speaker. The honourable members want to take percentages, they had 1·14 percent increase. Mr. Speaker, we examine the figures very closely, we know where they stand, we don't like this situation of bankruptices of any kind, whether there up one percent we don't like it but we certainly have more knowledge of the facts than the honourable members have taken the trouble to look into. · Mfl. SCH ROIEDIER: Thank you, Mr . Speake r, it appears that I've touched a sore nerve.

I wasn't asking for 19 77 statistics. (I nterjection)- No, I didn't say a sore head, I just said a sore nerve. What I did ask was whether he had any comments with respect to that specific ad and whether, Mr. Speai<er, it was the government of Manitoba which had some input into that ad, but while he was providing us with figures possibly the Minister could provide us with the figu res for the last full year of an ND P ·administration, as compared to the last full year of a Tory admin istra tion and tell us the numb er of business fai lures. MR. JOHNSTON: In 19 77 the NDP were in power until October 24, Mr.

Speaker, and in that time they went from 53 to 11 4 which is well over 10 0 percent, if that's the figure the honourable gentleman wants. li\IIIR. SPEA KER: The Honour able Mem ber for Minnedosa. MR. DAVID BlAKE: My question is directed to the First Minister in the abs ence of the Finance Minister, Mr. Speaker, in view of the high interest rates that prevail at the present time and the serious effect they are having on small business, farmers and wage earners in the province. I wonder if he might inform the House what actions the government is taking to tr y and assist in solving this par ticularly acute problem.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. l YOI\l: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance, as members of the House may know, is attending a meeting of all of the Ministers of Finance of Canada, including the federal government, today and I know what his intentions were, namely, that he would be proposing and others would be joining in the proposal, that the federal govern ment adopt a new method of fixing the interest rate in Canada, so as to help, if possible, the precipitive ri ses which have been occurring recently, which have been having precisely the effect that is descri bed by the Member for Minnedosa.

We realize, as I'm sure all members of the House do, that in terms of financing of small businesses, of farms, financing of inventory, of cash flow and so on, that the interest rate policies that are being followed at the pr esent time are causing hardship to individuals as well, and the only responsible way, ! suggest, Sir, in which action can be taken in this respect is for the federal government, in concert with the provinces, to work on a national policy which will amelior ate tha t problem.

And he is making representations today, along with his colleagues in that regard because it is acknowledged as being one of the serious problems at this time, notwithstanding the fact that we had a dr op during the summer they're now going back up, and notwithstanding the fact that the lag between the American rate and the Canadian rate has widened, I believe, by one point. And we will, of course, await tomorrow to see what the resu lts are from the pegging of the rate tomorrow. But that is a br ief report .

I'm sorry that the honourable members of the NDP don't find this of interest, but I'm sure the people of Manitoba do. ORDERS OF THE DAY THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. The time for question period havi ng expi red, we'll proceed with the Orders of the Day. The adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable Mem ber for Minn edosa and the amendment prop osed by the Honour able Leader of the Opposition. The Honourable Mem ber for lnkster , and I apologize to the Honourable Member for lnkster. I am not certain of the exact min utes left in his speech. This is an estimate only.

The Honourable Member for lnkster. MR. GRE EN : My friend, the Me mb er for St. Boniface says my time has expired, Mr. Speaker, and he indicated that there was going to be a kerfuffle about that today. I think that we have probably have had all the kerluffles that we can stand for a period of 24 hours. Mr. Speaker, I was in the middle of my speech yesterday and I told some of my Tory friends during the afternoon that I thought that I was making some miles against the Conservatives. I thought that I was getting to some of the more serious points.

And then, Mr. · Speaker, I was interrupted and I thought to myself, Mr. Speaker, would they go that far, I mean, Mr. Speaker, I've heard of dirty tricks but isn't this carryi ng it too extremes , Mr. Speaker? Wha t happened yesterday, surely the Conservative friends are complimenting me too much as to my effectiveness when they would go to that extreme, Mr. Speaker, knowing that I was probably not going to be here today, to try to interrupt my remarks. Well, Mr. Speaker, I too, have gone to extremes, I'm back and I'll try to pick up approximately where I left off. I was saying, Mr.

Speaker, that the one major announcement which was definite is something that came about as a result of the policies of the previous administration. A second one which seemed to be undefinite, but which was more definite than the others, that is the potash, was there long before the previous administration. I have to give credit to the Roblin administration but credit, Mr. Speaker, for maintaining a public potash resource, part of which has been removed to the people of the province, and I, being one of the shareholders wm be one of the people who suffer equivalentl y, from us by the Conservative administration.

And then I said, Mr. Speaker, that the purpose of the balance of the announcements, all of which are pie in the sky, are to rescue a Conservative administration that feels that it is finished, that it is not at the middle of the end or the beginning of the end but the ending of

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 the end, and they have made those announcements, Mr. Speaker, to try to restore their electoral position in the Province of Manitoba. And just as the honourable mem ber shou ld remember, that in 19 66 two definite announcements, and very big ones, the Nelson River Development and the CFI, came during the election campaign, or virtually during the election campaign, and resulted in a drop o f votes to the Conservative party and a drop of seats and the finishing, the virtually finishing of Duff Roblin as Premier of the Pr ovince of Manitoba.

You can rest assured that these pie in the sky announcements, Mr. Speaker, will have the same effect because, Mr. Speaker, what the Conservative party has lost, and I'm even quite surp rised because I never suspected of my friend, the First Minister, what it has lost is that it has lost its conviction. And the statement in the Throne Speech that is most important is the one that says, Mr. Speaker, my Ministers do not belie ve that government can afford to stand back, as though what happens in the economy were not of its concern.

Within our mixed economy, government has a variety of roles to play in encourag ing devel opment and ensuring that developments which do not take place serve the interests which do take place, serve the interests of · the people of the Province of Manitoba. Now what has happened, Mr. Speaker, is that the Conservatives have now declared, they've thrown up the white flag, and they say unconditional surrender; and they will, Mr. Speaker, because they have to, go back to the worst form of economic development.

I respected the Member for Lakeside, I respected the Member for Morris, the First Minister who said that the business of the economy is for individual and corporate businessmen to invest their capital, make money, create jobs and everybody gains, but that government becoming involved is a problem. That was conservatism, Mr. Speaker, it had a sound of conviction. I don't happen to believe in it, but those people who believe in it and carry it forward do have in my mind credibility, af least insofar as philosophy is concerned . Wha t has happened to this gove rnment, it has decla re d, Mr.

Spea ker, bankruptcy - that's a good word in view of the fact tha t it's on the increase, just adds to the percentages - and has indicated that it's going to go thr ough the worst form. They've used these announcements, Mr. Speaker, to titillate the fancies of the people of the Province of Manitoba that things are not as bad as they seem. And that's a kind of insidious use of an announcement, it's a use that a polit ical party enga ges in when it has nothing substantial to offer but it's not the most insidious use, Mr. Speaker.

The most insidious use is yet to come and I predict that it will come with regard to the Alcan announcement because there will be a no aluminum company in operation in the Province of Manitoba, nor will there be a definite commitment to an aluminum company in the Province of Manitoba prior to the next election. During the next election there are going to be titillating remarks about the Conservatives bringing in an aluminum company and these will be coupled, Mr.

Speaker, - and I say this because+ know what has historically taken place - with the suggestion that if the government changes the aluminum company does not come in. There will be, Mr. Speaker, quotes from the managers of the aluminum compa ny who will always say, Mr. Speaker, we are not involved in politics, we will not comment on a political campaign but if you're asking us whether we look to the economic climate of a province or we look to whether or not there is the kind of government under which we can flourish or which we cannot flourish, cer tainly we do, Mr . Speaker.

All of this based on zero and all of it intended, Mr. Speaker, to effect the democratic process of the Province of Manitoba as between and as of vital importance - where will the government of Manitoba be, Mr. Speaker? Will it be the decision­ making process be in the hands of the people or will it be in the hands of those people who say that if you have the kind of government that you think you want you won't have Alcan, and that's what's going to come, Mr. Speaker .. And at that point, Mr. Speaker, I say to my friends on the right-hand side because that's the big issue - what do you say?

Because I know from time to time, Mr. Speaker, that the remarks that come out, oh yes, we are going to provide a good climate and don't worry and we are going to be nice people and you can come in. You can say that, Mr.

Speaker, or you can say what drew me to the New Democratic Party, that if there is a viable, economic operation in the Province of Manitot-.�·..not going to be dependent on whether or not Alcan comes in or Alcan does not come in - the people of this province using their resources, using their expertise, using their initiative, are prepared to say that there will be no diminution of economic activity-;within this province and if the public has to do it, the public Is capable to do it and the public will do it. and that's the only answer, Mr. Speaker.

If there is any other answer forthcoming from the New Democratic Par ty then the New Democratic Pa rty does not exist. As as alterna tiv e in the province it can get elected, it can become the Li beral fork to the Conservative spoon, but if it does not, Mr. Speaker, - as Mr. Trudeau was elected - it's not going to be di ffi cult for the alterna tive in government to be electet:l'in'Manlto ba in the next election. As I have said on numerous occasions, looking at the Conservatives, Mr. Speaker, anybody can beat them.

But when one looks at the New Democrat does one say anybody will beat them , because anybody is not enough. That kind of government, that kind of electoral success is ne ver success for the New Democratic Party or for the people who have gone into .it. Mr.

Speaker, just as the New Democratic Party in the last election had a l ack of conviction in putting forward its publi c pr ogr ams, Its pu blic mining program, where we were 50 percent owners of every new development that started in the Province of Manitoba and where we had abandoned, and it took us some years to do it, the policy of going into businesses when they fail, which was not our policy, it was a Conservative policy, it was a Li beral policy, and we kept it up just for the very reason that I say that we were not convicted, did not have conviction. But in the last three years, Mr.

Speaker, we said that we would go into viable business, we would not pick up only the bad paper, and in. those four years of the MDC, Mr. Speaker, the last four years, we started to make money and of all the businesses that we had difficulty with, only one that was started after 19 73 100

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 had any problem. That was Evergreen Peat Moss in which we were 50-50 partners with a pr ivate enterpris e company, and that happens. As the Min ister of Economic Development now knows, it happens. But, Mr. Speaker, the Conservative Pa rty has declared its bankruptcy and now we are waiting to see what kind ol alternative will be in the Province of Manitoba, and I repeat, Mr.

Speaker, if the New Democratic Party is not for public ownership as a vehicle for the purpose of maintaining the economic development of the Province of Manitoba and not relying on the intimidation that you're going to get from Alcan, you mark my words you'll get it, then it stands for nothing and ther e may as well be a Li beral Pa rty on this side of the House or a Conservative Party or a Social Credit Party. I'm hoping, Mr. Speaker, hoping against hope that is not the case, but I think, M r. Speaker, I have perceived some peculiar psychology within the New Democratic Party. I remember, Mr.

Speaker, in the Steinkopf incident where a man, a member of !his House was disqualified by law from sitting if he did certain things, there were allegations made against him. At that time, Mr. Speaker, the New Democratic Party as a group were saying, oh. we can't say anything bad about Mr. Steinkopf, we won't even run against him in the next election and didn't field a candidate, Mr. Speaker. but yesterday as a block to a man. Is that something upon which you form a party position?

When you start forming a party position as to whether a person should be kicked out of the House, when you start forming a party position as to whether you will permit a doctor to remove my blood without my consent and send it to the police and that becomes a party policy position, which you expect every member to get up and vote for, you're not reflecting a solidarity of strength. A strong party could let people vote any way on those issues. The very fact that they have blocked on that kind of issue, Mr. Speaker, indicates a problem for the New Democratic Party. Mr.

Speak er, the Cons ervat ive Par ty in the Province of Ma nitoba on one issue is not the gr eatest problem that we have in our province. Because, Mr. Speaker, on this one issue and in their last year they can do a great service. We can always get rid of the Conservative Party. We can beat Mr. Lyon and will beat him, but we cannot beat those people who now say that they have a right to pass a law with 14 5 seats which will govern us and which nobody can overrule in the future. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I say that the Conservative Party can play a service to this province in its last 12 months of office because. Mr.

Speaker, the Conservative Party can help the people of Manitoba tal<e a position against a proposal, Mr. Speaker, which will take out of this House. by the way, the right possibly to expel one of its members, which was exercised yesterday - and although I disagree I say that the House has that right - the right to deal with censorship; the right to deal with abortion; take out of the Parliament of Canada the right to deal with abortion; the right to deal with questions of hate literature; the right to deal, Mr.

Speaker, with the question of expropriation of property and the operation of business; all of those things can potentially be taken away from us by what the government of Canada is now doing and I say, Mr. Speaker, that the Con servative party can play a service. And I put it to the First Minister, and I'm sorry he's not in the House, that at the moment he does not appear to have a contingency plan as to what happens if his court action fails and I believe, Mr. Speaker, that nothing is going to be resolved in the court action.

The questions will either not be answered in a way as to be meaningful, or -if they are answered, they will have no effect on what the government of Canada does, and certainly perhaps will have no effect on what the Parliament of Westminster does. But we do, Mr. Speaker, we do have a contingency plan and I am putting it forward to this Fir st Minister, who doesn't happen to be here and I ask him to consider it. Ther e is a continge ncy plan. Mr .

Speaker, all of the years we've talked about having to throw off - what do you call it when you are hanging on to the mother's apron strings of Gr eat Britai n, and this is the last apron string, patriation - and Gr eat Britain has behaved, Mr. Speaker, in the last 30-40 years in any event, in such a way as to not do anything to interfere with internal politics in Canada and therefore they are somehow of the opinion that they have to do whatever Canada asks them to do. Now, Mr.

Speaker. when the court action fails - and I say it will fail, and even if it doesn't fail, it should be a contingency plan - the Province of Mani toba should go to Gr eat Britai n, on Gr eat Brita in's own terms, that we should convince Great Britain that we are asl<ing them not to interfere with the internal politics of Canada. That insofar as patriation is concerned we have absol utely no object ion to it, that the Constitution should be patriated, but th en, Mr. Speaker, the other changes that are being requested should be obtained under the same rules as Mr.

Trudeau says will apply to what you have to do afterwards. If you're going to have to get a majority of the provinces, having a majority of the people in this country, to change the Bill of Rights, at very worst, Mr. Speaker, we could ask that 50 percent of the provinces, plus 50 percent ol the people should be in favour of enacting the Bill of Rights. What could be more fair, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, you know I have started off and there should be - and this is going to be a tough one, Mr.

Speaker - ther e should be an all- party committee because the question of a Constitutional Bill of Rights is not a party issue. Those people who are start ing to talk agains t the opponents of entrenchment as reactionaries, are going to put into the reactionary class, many many New Democrats. Mr . Speaker, I !<now that virtually half the people on this side have been against an entrenched Biii of Rights and to su ggest that they are reactionary is silly, and to block them and to say that we have to maintain unity on this question is silly.

There are people on that side, Conservatives, who believe in an entrenched Bill of Rights and therefore, if I take the Member for St. Johns at his word that we should dialogue and consideration and discussion, I expect that everybody is going to be able to vote without a party block on this issue. I expect that some New Democrat who I know is against an entrencl]ed BH� of Righis, will second the motion that I have on the Order Paper and we will have a lull discussion on it, Mr. Speaker. 101

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 But I'm going to suggest something even better. I'm going to suggest, Mr. Speaker, the Parl iamentary Committee won't hear them, but if Mr. Lyon, plus members of each party who happen to be and agains t - and I include in tha t In dependents because I want to go -· should go to Great Britain, absolutely, talk to the parliamentarians because they won't let you appear before committee, but each parli amentary caucus in Britain has its own committee and they will hear you and all you have to do is convince them, Mr.

Speaker, that their own policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of Canada is what is being requested. We are asking them not to do this because we kro w that they don't wish to interfere and I'm sugges ting, M . r. Speaker, to the Conservative administration that they plan, immediately, such a view because I believe, Mr.

Speaker, the situation is turning around. it's interesting you know, some of the people who say that they are for an entrenched Bill of Rights, they say, we are for an entrenched Bill of Rights because it prevents the tyranny of the majority and if you will look at the polls you will see that the majority are in our favour. They want the government to enact the Bill of Rights because they say that the majority is for it. Mr. Speaker, that's interesting, the majority is turning around. And do you know why it is turning around, Mr. Speaker? Because people are start ing to unde rstand what is being said.

You go to a person who believes in the free right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy and you say, do you. believe in an entrenched Bill ol Rights? She says, yes. And you say, what should be in an entrenched Bill of Rights? I believe that there should be in an entrenched Bill of Rights, the right for a woman to terminate her pregnancy at any time. She is added up as a statistic of somebody who believes in an entrenched Bill of Rights. Then you go to a right to life person and you say, do you believe in an entrenched Bill of Rights? They say, yes, I believed in an entrenched Bill of Rights.

What should be in the entrenched Bill of Rights? I believe that it should be in the entrenched Bill of Rights that the right to life of an unborn child is protected from the moment of conception. Two statistics in favour of an entrenched Bill of Rights. Both of them don't believe in an entrenched Bill of Rights. Everybody who appears before that committee, Mr. Speaker, and if you start watching it you will see it. They all believe that their rights should be entrenched. Mr. Speaker, I have a revelation. I now believe in an entrenched Bill of Rights. I've been converted.

Of course you have to put into it what I say and number one of this entrenched Bill of Rights, and I want to ask any of you if this is unreasonable, whether what I am saying -(Int erjection)- no, it won't even go that far. lt won't go for anything that I am solely for but for what every body is for. Numb er one of the entrenched Bill of Rights: that no parliament should be able to pass a law that cannot be modified , changed or repealed by another parliament. Shouldn't that be entrenched in a Bill of Hights?

Secondly, that no parliament shall delegate to a non-elected person the power to enact social - for all time - to enact social and economic policy for the people of this Canada, which cannot be undone by that same parliament. Do you agree with that? That should be i n the entrenched Bill. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, Clauses 1 and 2 shall be interpreted by parliament. Now I'm in favour of an entrenched Bill of Rights. And what have I said, Mr.

Speaker, what have I said that if I did not go to a citizen in the street and say to him, do you believe that this parliament should be able to pass laws which cannot be changed by another parliament? He'd say, of course not and they would say, of course not, Mr. Sp eaker. But we have 14 5 parliamentarians, not one sitting west of the City of Winnipeg, who presume to say for all time that the laws that they are passing have such great wisdom, as to preclude them being changed by any other people. Now, Mr.

Speaker, there have been entrenched Bills of Rights and there are in other countries and in most unitary states, they are very easy to change. The amendments are easy to come by, which is not the case in Canada, but they have not been enacted in that way. In the United States, for instance, the entrenched the Bill of Rights came as a result ol amendments to the Constitution and they needed the req uir ements which are now imposed on future changes. Is that what's going to happen to these changes? No, Mr. Speaker. So I say that Sterling Lyon - excuse me, Mr.

Speaker, I say that the Premier of the Pro vinc e ·of< Man itoba does not happen to be at the moment the worst threat to either social and economic change in this province, he's not the worst threat to social and economic changes. The worst threat to social and economic change is the proposed entrenched Bill of Rights. The Premier of this province is not the worst threat to democracy in this province and to the political process in this province. We can beat the Premier and, by the way, he accepts that.

I respect that the Premier of this province thinks that he is 1, 000 percent right, but he also says that if you guys beat me, you are entit led to do what the publi c has elected you to do. Mr. Trudeau says, I am 10, 000 percent right and if you beat me, I still prevail. Now, I certainly respect Lyon or the Premier of this province in that respect, more ·tha n I respect the Prime Minister of this country and therefore, Mr.

Speaker, and given the fact that he's only got a year to go or thereabou!s, I say that on his strongest point, which I say this issue at the present time is his strongest point -(int erjection)- at the present time is his strongest point that he eo-opt, and I immediately put in my application, a committee of this House of people - after all, we know that the pro entrenchers have got the government of Canada and the Senate who are going to pass a resolution, so there's no difficulty in them making their wills known, but there is a difficulty for others of us. Mr.

Speaker, it's interesting, I wanted to appear before the Parliamentary Committee in Ottawa. it's not like here where anybody can appear. They pick on groups, Mr. Sp eaker. If I had formed myself as the Canadian Associ ation of Di saffected New Democrats, I could maybe have got on their list. (Int erjection)- Oh, yes, there are more than one. I could maybe yet -- I mean there is Frank Syms, there were other people, but if I could have formed - then they said - or if I could have said the Canadian Association of People of -(lnt erjection)­ mentally retarded, my friend says. I could even got on, on that basis.

But I applied to appear and this is 102

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 what they said, Mr. Speaker, they now say, and it's never been an ele ction issue, after all, Mr. Trudeau never went to the p1,1blic and said he's going to entrench a Bill of Rights in the Constitution. What had happened , Mr. Speaker, is they said that five individuals could come; two to be chosen by the Li beral Party . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The honourable member has five minutes. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, two to be chosen by the Li beral Party, two to be chosen by the Con servative Party and one to be chosen by the New Democratic Party. Can you tell me, Mr.

Speaker, where I fit in? There's absolutely no way. MRS. WESTBURY: You don't even want to fit in, sir. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I tell the Member tor Fort Rouge that my participation tor 18 years in a political party and the manner in which I did it, if you want to obtain information as to whether I fit in and whether I worked in, you can obtain it from the people in this House. They will disabuse you of what you are saying, disabuse you of what you are saying. So, Mr.

Speaker, I'm saying that I wanted to go, I still want to go, I still think tha t Gr eat Britai n, we can be saved by Gr eat Britain by them doing exactly what they have always done, do not interfere in Canadian politics. We don't want a colonial power and, Mr. Speaker, I have not regarded myself as living in a colonial country over the last 52 years, that's all my life. I've never really noticed that there is any problem. When everybody is running around saying that what we know is some people want one thing and some people want another thing, but nobody is for the status quo, Mr. Speaker, they forgot me.

I am for the status quo until you show me that what you are doing is better than the status quo. When you show me that what you are doing will more serve the interests of the people of this country - Mr. Speaker, I put that proposal to the First Minister, I hope that some of my colleagues will see to it that he gets it because I certainly am serious in putting it forward. Mr. Speaker, the one other thing that amused me - I've just · got a few minutes so I'll try and deal with it quickly - that two years ago they suggested that the economy was a shambles, that it was impossible to govern.

And in the first year they gave up 73 million in tax relief. They said they did; it was not quite the truth but they said they did, coming into a province where it was a sham bles, where it was bankrupt. Imm ed iately they red uced taxes, 73 million, that's what they said and now they say, Mr. Speaker, that Hydro is in good shape. Two years ago, they had a commissioner say that 600 to 800 to 1 billion - use any figure you want to - assault was made on our Hydro prog ram. Then they froze rates. This company, which is in terri ble shape, they froze rates for five years and now it's in good shape. Mr.

Speaker, it brings to mind the story of a fellow who was at a field day, a track and field day. He was talking to his friend and he said that yesterday his son was in a terri ble accident, both legs were broken , his hips were displa ced , his ribs were crushed , his lung was punctur ed , his face was completely lacerated, his spine was broken and all of these things happened to him yestesrday. The fellow said, what's he doing today? He just won the decathlon. He just won the decathlon in this meet. Now that's what's happened, Mr. Speaker, to the Hydro.

There has been a mir aculous recovery, a miraculous recovery, overnight, Mr . Speaker. Hydro, after freezing rates for five years and after having been put into terri ble shape, it is now in good shape. Wha t was done, Mr. Speaker? What was done? Absolutely nothing which indicates that the fellow did not break both his legs, that he did not hurt his spine, that he did not punc ture his kidney, that he was in solid health and he won the decathlon, Mr. Speaker, because he had been well trained , well looked after, well conditioned and in good health.

That's what the economy of the province was before it was taken over by this bunch. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. GARY FIL MON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. May I begin by offering to you congratulations on the resumption of your high office in this Chamber. I am confident that you will continue to preside over the workings of the Cham ber with your customar y fairness and impartiality and good humour. You have obviously been put to the test early on in this Session and have come through again in good form.

May I also extend to the Premier and members of his Executive Council congratulations on providing again this year their brand of leadership, which includes a commitment to a government that's willing to work dil igently to accomplish worthwhile goals tor the province, to restore order, confidence, and the principles of sound management to our provincial economy.

May I also say to mem bers opposite, and all members in the House, and indeed in the gallery, guests and visitors in the gallery, my good wishes in the forthc oming holiday season, tor those who celeb rate the Christma s festival, and also to all Manitobans, my very best wishes tor 19 81, may it be a year of health and happiness and may they have the time to enjoy all the things that they treasure in life here in Manitoba. This is an interesting opportunity for me.

Last year I had the privilege of moving the Throne Speech, and of cour se in that privi lege come certain formalities and traditions that have to be acknowledged and those formalities and traditions perhaps limit the range and scope of one's debate on the Throne Speech, and so I look upon this more as a first opportun ity to address a Throne Speech, in the normal debating form, and I'm looking forward to it, because during the past months since we last met, there have been some very interesting and exciting events in Manitoba and I intend to cover all of them, or as many as I can in addr essing the Throne Speech, because I think they are all intertwined.

But I do have to acknowledge that I feel somewhat like Rodney Dangerfield in standing up here, because yesterday I was scheduled to speak and of course the intervening events didn't allow it, but of course greater things took place and more important events, so here I am today. Some of the interesting events, of course, that have taken pla ce in rece nt ti mes include the 103

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 response of the Honourable Leader of the Opposition to the Throne Speech. lt has finally conveyed to me the meaning of the acronym ND P, No Defin ite Policies, because, Mr. Speaker, the Leader ga ve us no definite policies in his response to the Throne Speech. In fact, I don't think he even understood the policies that were presented in the Throne Speech. He certainly didn't acknowledge an understanding if he ha d one. He set about to criticize the Throne Speech for what it did say or didn't say, on a variety of issues and he entirely missed the point.

But I'm not surpris ed at that because members opposite have demonstrated in their No Definite Policy stance on so many issues, that there's no agreement on anything. There's no understanding against them, let alone of anything else that transpires in this House. You could tell right from the minute he stood up the day that he add ressed the Throne Speec h, he announced to us tha t the members of the opposition were foregoing their opportunity to have a question period.

Right after that, of course, we found out that they hadn't agreed on that, and there were members opposite who d.id not go along with that statement. Later on in the day, ther e was an understanding that because the Leader was giving his response to the Thr one Speech, that the members opposite would not participate in the debate that day. Of course, the Member for St. Johns sh owed us that there wasn't an understanding on that side.

And so, again there doesn't seem to be any real agreement amon gst them, so it's not unus ual that ther e shouldn't be any policies that they stand behind. (I nterjection)- Well, okay, the Constitutional issue. There's another one. How about that for an agreement on the other side. A defi nite stance except that it's not rea!iy very definite. There are a number who have not taken a very firm position and in fact some, who I suspect, will not be able to achieve agreement when this finally comes to a vote in the House. And, of cours e, we haye their approach to small business.

They've told us over and over again, how they are in favour of small busi ness, that small business is really, in their view, very important to the Manitoba economy. At the same time they suggest to us that if they're returned to office that they're going to reinstate rent controls. And, of course, I don't have to tell you about their stance on ownership of farm property. I don't have to tell you about their stance on - that's gove rnment ownership of farm property I'm speaking of - their stand on oil devel opment, or mine ral resource development.

Well, you know, not all of these kinds of ventures, farming, resource development, not all of these ventures are carried out by just large corporations. There are many small enterp ris es and operations who carry on activities in th ose fields, and I suggest to you that those are the small businesses that you suggest that you are in !avour of. You are the people who brought in the corporate capital tax, one of the most damaging and disruptive and negative taxes that this province has ever seen, it's greatest effect on small busin esses, but the friends of small business they say they are, opposite.

No Definite Policy, Mr. Speaker, that's what I suggest to you. The Leader of the Opposition told us about all of the promises that had been made and broken by members on this side. Well, Mr. Speaker, let's review some of them. The promises such as reduced taxes. What did this government do? lt came in, reduced pers onal, corporate, small business taxes. Increased the level of exemption to those on the corporate capital tax. Got rid of that nuisance, that punitive, inheritance tax; the mi neral acreage tax; all of those things. We're carrying out the promises that our government put forward in coming into office.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, -(lnt erjection)­ we promis ed, Mr . Speaker, that there would be lesser involvement of the government in the business of the private sector. We promised that there would be a red uction in spe nding. We came int o government and we im med iately took steps to red uce the size of gover nment, to reduce the spending of government, to bring spending under some semblance of control. What do we get over there? We get No Definite Policy.

The only thing that we can be sure of is that they're going to change their mind some time between now and the next election, or after the next election, -depending on what happens. All you get is a definite maybe, Mr. Speaker, and is it any wonder. I've heard of lame duck go ver nments such as we have in the United States right now, but l think we're faced with a lame duck opposition at the present time. Mr. Speaker, is it any wonder that there wasn't any investor confidenc e in this province when the members opposite were in power for eight years?

And the Leader of the Opposition suggests that there should have been a massive turnaround in the three years of government that we've had. He suggests that after they spent all of their time and energy and directed all their policies to dr iving out investment,_ to discouraging people from starting businesses in this province, that all tho se things should have turned around overnight, or at least within three years.

They, on the one hand, argue that we're doing nothing to stimulate housing construction, that we should be encourag ing more and more housing construction in this province, and they suggest they're going to come back with rent controls, which would have the exact opposite effect, Mr. Speaker, is it any wonder what's happening on the other side, how there is No Definite Policy on anything that's put forward. Take a look at some of the things that the Leader of the Opposition said in his address the other day. He said that the Throne Speech totally ignored the native people.

The Throne Speech states, and I quote "r ecognizing the need for increased emplo yment and economic activity in northern Manitoba, my government is negotiating a new northern development agre ement, to repl ace the expiring Northlands Agreement". That is one of the single most important thin gs affecting economic development in the north, Mr. Speaker, and we are committed to negotiating that agreement, so that it benefits all northern Manitobans, and particularly native people.

This is on top of the existing policy, which we as a government have, of stimulating private initiatives and greater economic viability in the north. Pol icies such as contrac ting road construction to Indian bands, through the Highways and Transporta tion Depart ment of my honourable

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 colleague. Expansions of the lending policies of the CEDF, to include Treaty Ind ian projects. These are means of encouraging our na tive population to have a gr eater economic status in the Pr ovince of Manitoba. But, of cour se, obviously the Leader of the Opposition wasn't listenin g to it. And he had a prepared speech. I give you that as well. He had a prepar ed speech. He suggested that we're doing nothing about Garrison. I have here, Mr.

Speaker, press release after press release, telling you what the Min ister of Natur al Resou rces and inde ed the Premier of this province have been doing, putting on the record, where it counts with every member of the US government, where we stand and what we believe should ha ppen with respect to Garrison. But he ignores all that. Northern roads, he suggested nothing is being done on northern roads. There has been a considerable upgrading of northern roads under our government. Provincial road 39 1 is an example. The total winter road mileage in the north is greater now than it was before.

This all to do with northern road construction and he ignores that entirely. He suggests that nothing is being done in the Por t ol Churchill. My colleague, the Member for Rock Lake, got up time after time in this House. I have two press releases from the Minister of Agriculture in which he discusses the grain handling issues in Victoria, with great concentration on Churchill and what the advantages it has and what the importance of Churchill could be to the agricultural community in this province. Totally ignored.

Here's another one of April 13, the Minister of Agriculture stated the position of this government again on Churchill. "Downey proposes steps to boost Churchill's use". But of course, I don't expect the Leader of the Opposition to pay any attention to that. He had a speech that was prepared, ignoring totally what went on in the government; ignoring totally what had been done; ignoring totally what the Throne Speech said was intended to be done, and he just put forward a position just as he's done in the past.

And I suggest to you that the people of this province should expect more leadership from him and from his party. lt's said that a good opposition makes good government and I suggest to you that we're not getting our assistance from that side of the House, Mr. Speaker. But there are many, many interesting things that are happening in this province, but there are exciting things as well. For instance, since we last met we had the announcement from the Mohawk people that they had exercised their option on the Minnedosa Distillery.

We are going to have in this province, the fi rst plant producing fuel alcohol in the entir e country. By April 1, the intention is to distribute gasah ol through western Canada and soon, hopefully, the entire country. This is going to provide a ready market for over two million bushels of grain, for the producers of Manitoba. it's going to be a contribution to getting oH petroleum oil and into renewable energy sources. That's in concert not only with our provincial energy policy but the federal energy policy. A very exciting devel opment, Mr. Speaker. But members opposite aren't interested in that.

Wha t else has been happening arou nd the province. Wel l, there are other interes ting developments, the Titanic has a new captain, Doug Lauchlan is his name, I think, -(I nterjection)- I understand that he was here the other day in the gallery, I thought that was appropriate because he probably still had his parachute on. He's operating, of course, in the true Li beral trad ition. He's just arr ived in our province after 20 years of absence and he's telling everybody what should be done. He has no knowledge of what has gone on, no knowledge of what should be done, but he's telling everybody what's wrong.

He's telling us what's wrong with the government, he's telling us what's wrong with the opposition, well, on second thought I guess he does have a few things that he understands. But in any case, he came into the province and he told us what was wrong. Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you that the Leader of the Opposition deli berately entered into this old wive's tale again of the diversion of funds for health care spending in this province. I have to tell you that I thought that issue was laid to rest when Mr. Justice Emmett Hall reported earlier this year, just a couple of months ago.

The essence of his report was that the statements that had been made by, I believe it was Monique Begin, the federal Minister of Health and members opposite during various debates to the suggestion that we were in some way not operating according to the intention of the federal-provincial agreements for health care funding, was totally laid to rest. They were totally false in the view of Mr.

Justice Emmett Hall's report More so than that he gave us various figures that were very , very interesting because he said that health care spending in this province is the second hig hest in rela tion to our total budg et, as a percentage of our total budget, of any province in Canada. I think that's a pretty commendable position to be in. He also indicated that our supply of hospital beds, nursing home beds, and total care beds in relation ·to our population is well above the national averag e.

He ind icated tha t our compr ehensiv e children's dental care program and our excellent fly­ in medical service for residents of the north are so good that they might well be emulated by other medical institutions in other provinces. Now is that an indication of a government that's ignoring health care in a province? I suggest not, and I suggest that it's a mark that the Leader of the Opposition ought not to be proud of for him, after having this information because indeed it was disseminated, I think, widely to persist in trying to have that falsehood spread in Manitoba and I think that it's wrong.

The honourable federal Minister at least had to apologize and indicate that she was wrong in the contention that she had made. But in this case the Leader of the Op position contin ues with this misapprehension and he continues to try and spread it publicly which I think he should be criticized for. The other thing of course that I wonder about is his sug gest ion that they will in addition to reins tituting rent controls, that they would if re­ elected to government ensure that there was no priv ate sector involvement in the social service delivery sys tems of this province.

In those particular instances he was suggesting that they wpuld force out the priv ate corporat ions from personal care homes and from day care in this province. That bothers me, Mr. Speaker, it bothers me a great deal 105

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 because 1 wonder if he's suggesting to ·us that the public sector has a corner on the market for care and compassion. 1 think that that's what his intent is. If he suggests that, Mr. Speaker, how far is he willing to carry it? Is he goin g to say that doctors who opt out of Medicare ought not to be covered, ought not to be allowed to be in pracUce in .this province because if he is he ·is treading on dangerous ground. At the ·same time, Mr. Speaker, where is going to carry that to?

Is he next going to say that dentists, because in effect they operate under a private sector system, they are sole pr actitioners who institute their charges dir ectly with the patient and under no government su pervision, is he going to suggest that next its the dentists because they're delivering social and health care services in this province? Are they the next to feel the lash of the New Democratic policies? -(Int erjection)- What next, sure are we going to .say that nobody who's in the field of education ought to be there?

Well you tell that to the people in the Un ited States where the best standards of education are found in private universities. You want to talk about the Vales and the Harvards and the Stanfords and all of the universities in the Un ited States, Rice, they're privately funded universities. Are you going to suggest that they ought to be dr iven . out of education entirely? Well I'd like to know that and I'm sure the people of this pr ovince would like to know that.

When you talk about having a corner on the market on care and compassion in this province I want you to tell that to· the people who support the Un ited Way, the major corporate donors who not only give substantial sums of money but who give loaned representatives to go out and call door to door and spread the message and the good word of the Un ited Way - tell them that you don't want their participation in social services in this province - tell that to the variety clubs and the Lions with their telethons - tell them that you don't want any private involvement in the delivery of social services and health care in this province because I'm sure they'll be interested to know tha t.

Mr. Speaker, the thing tha t bothers me about all this, somebody once told me that we had three classes of people in society - there are taxpayers, there are tax avoiders and there are tax consumers. lt seems to me that the policies that are being proposed by the Leader of the Op position all involve converting people in those first two categories into the latter category of tax consumer. I want to know who's going to pay the taxes in this province.

If you take over the private industries who are involved, if you take over the private operators in the personal care homes, you're going to do two things, you're going to take some taxpayers off the tax rolls and you're going to add them to the tax consuming part of our economy. I sugg est to you tha t if you continue, that sooner or later there aren't going to be too many sources of income for this province. At the sa!lle time, Mr.

Speaker, you're going to have to raise those funds by other means and it seems to me that the members of the opposition are going to have to come clean and tell us where do they intend to raise that money? Are they going to raise taxes? Is that what they're going to do? A. MEMB ER: ' Sure they will. MR. FIL MON: Well, you better let us know because which are they? Are you going to impose new taxes? Succession duties, are they coming· back on again? Or are we going to bring new corporation capital taxes so that the small businessman is going to have to participate? A. MEMBER: Sales tax. ·MR.

FILMON: Js the sales tax going to go up? They'r e going to print money, the Mem ber for Brandon West tells me they're going to print money - that's perhaps a novel approach to it but not one that I would put past them. -(Int erjection)- Things can only get better, says the Member for Elmwood. Well, I suggest to you that if it's under these policies things will not get better. Mr. Sp eaker, there are other ex citing thin gs happening in this province and the Throne Speech tells about them and they'r e futu re -orie nted developments.

We've talked about Trout Lake and the many millions of dollars that are going to be poured into the Manitoba economy as a result of that. The Member for lnkster, he told us about the fact that Trout Lake and the potash were all things that had been developed before or establis hed before and that the Pr ovince of M anitoba owned 50 percent of them . A. MEMBER: 49 percent.. MR. FIL MON: 49 percent, except that we had 49 percent of nothing. We had no operating mines, we bad no operating developments and we had 49 percent of nothing.

I'd rather have 25 percent of a viable operating mine that's paying money into our economy than 49 percent of nothing, ·and we were getting nothing and now we're going to have hundreds of millions of dollars and hundreds of jobs ir r tlfe province as a result of eliminating the mineral acreage tax, elim inating our involvement so that there was an incentive for other people to spend money and dt;�velop these resources and that's why it is. The Mem ber for lnkster .. .atso suggested in his speech that they had learned from their mistakes in investing in private corporations.

They weren't only· taking over losing corporations and propping them up with tax dollars from you and me and every one of our taxpaying public but in fact they were making better investments in the last few years. They had picked their investments a lot better. But he doesn't tell you about the King Choy Foods and he doesn't tell you about the Saunders Airc raft and he doesn't tell you about all the losers, which they've had before and they will still have because they as government didn't know how to operate business and should never have been involved in operating businesses.

He sug gests to you tha t the economy is a sham bles today - tha t our handle on what's happening in the provincial economy is not very strong. Let me tell you about what happened in late 19 77 when the Member for Seven Oaks came before this House as a Minister of the Crown and told the House in September of 1977 that the pr ojected deficit for this province in the fiscal year was 25 million. MR. DEP UTY SPEAKE R, Abe Kovnats (Radisson): Order please. The Honourable Member for lnkster on a point of privilege. 106

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The honourable member says that the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks came before this House in September of 19 77, this House was not in session in September of 19 77. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before I acknowledge the Honourable Member for River Heights, might I just ask the co-operation of the House. With the new sound system and the banging of the desks and the rattling of the papers it makes it very difficult for me to be able to pick out the mem ber to be reprimanded for making all the noise.

So I would ask a little bit of co-operation from the members of the House. The Honourable Member for River Heights. MR. FIL MON: Mr. Speaker, I apolog ize for engendering so much enthusiasm with the exciting things I have to speak about with regard to the Throne Speech today. I note that the Member for lnkster did not deny that the statement was made. I apologize if it was not made in this House. The Member for Seven Oaks indicated that we were facing as a province a projected deficit of 25 million in September of 19 77.

One month later, or perhaps six weeks after the elec tion to office of this government, we found that the projected devicit was in fact 225 million. That is what I call an economy in a shambles. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Mem ber for lnkster on a point of privi lege. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, again, the honourable member said that I accepted the statement, the Member for Seven Oaks is not here but I know he . did .not make tl"!a.t statement. Mr.. Speaker, he made a statement that the operating deficit would be 25 million.

The capital deficit was announced several months earlier at 10 0 million for a total budgeted deficit of 12 5 million, not 25 million. MR. FIL MON: Well, Mr. Speaker, I accept that they were only out by 50 percent in their es timates but that was after a great deal of management and cost cutting by the government, yes, indeed. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that the Member for lnkster did bring to the House that is of great importance and it's one that I know that all members are interested and · concerne d about is the constitutional debate.

Perhaps this may be the single most important issue of our lifetimes as members of the Legislature. I think that there are a number of questions that have to be asked, questions that are on the lips and in the minds of so many of us, the foremost of which is why is this being pushed so quickly? Why are we aba ndoning all the other concerns that we as a province, we as a country have, the health of our economy, the sagging dollar, the rising int erest rate s , rampant inflation and unemployment and all of those things in favour of pushing through this particular item? In addition to that, Mr.

Sp eaker, our leader is attempting to respond to the issue that's being forced upon us by the government of Canada. Mr. Speaker, in addition to being the single most important issue I believe that it's probably the single most understood issue because it's being clouded by all sorts of arguments that are being put forward. There's a suggestion being put forward, and I won't say who's behind it or what their motives might be that to oppose the constitutional package of the federal government is to be opposed to patriation.

Simple patriation is not the question, it's been said before and I'll say it again, I believe that all of us can ag ree on patriation of the constitution - to bring it home is something that I doubt that any Legislature of this country will oppose. What we need to agree upon is how to do it. The second issue that's being totally confused is the issue of the entr enched Charter of Rights and Freedoms. lt's being laid out as a simple opposition to the protection of human rights and freedoms. If you are opposed to this entrenched Charter, ergo you must be opposed to the better protection of rights and freedoms.

I suggest to you that that is doing a disservice to this entir e debate because again you will find total agreement on the need always for better protection of human rights and freedoms amongst all of us in this Chamber. But you have to look at where it's coming fr om; you have to look at how it's being portrayed. I quote to you from the debates of the House of Commons from Page 3356 of Hansard, Mr. Speaker. "I believe this debate once again shows how relevant and valuable an institution Parl iament is. I, for one, am very glad that the debate has finally come to its proper home.

The debate about the Constitutional laws of this country is now outside the arena of the federal-p rovincial conference and in an arena where the full range of opinions and views in all regions can be heard , exp ressed , de bated and dis cusse d." That's a very noble statement. That sounds as though it comes from somebody who is really interested in listening to the views of all Canadians on this par ticular issue. lt's a state ment, Mr .

Speaker, that was made on October 7 by th� Unemployment and Imitation (sic) Minister from this area and a very noble one, indeed, except that less than two weeks later, after fewer than one-qu arter of the 12 4 members of the opposition had spoken, closure was imposed. Parliament didn't hear the views of all Canadians because you know as well as I do tha t the majority of those mem bers in the opposition come from one entire reg ion of this country and their views were not adequately heard and the debate did not adequately provide for them to make the views of their constituents and of their regions known.

Further, in that same debate, the statement was made, "In the end, this is the place where the choice should be made. lt is not to be made around the table by 11 people who, though they represent regions, do not in any way represent the full range of opinions and views within those regions.

As one of the western members of the government benches, I think it is very important that I express this other point of view which I, together with hundreds of thousands of western Canadians, believe was not expressed at the Federal- Pr ovincial Conference last Septem ber." Aga in, that's what was said in the House of Commons by Mr . Axworthy. I want to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the Gallup Poll that was recently published indicated tha' Canadians overall are opposed two to one to uni lateral patriation of the Constitution and even more in greater numbers in western Canada. So I suggest to 107

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 you that M r. Axworthy should be "a little perplexed" because that's what he said when he heard those results, because he had found support increasing for the federal package. That's what he said. I think he ought to be a little perplexed and I think we ought to ask what is the position of the New Democrats on this particular issue because we have some very strange statements being made by them. (Int erjection)- Here we have it, it's titled "Historical Highlight"; I could subtitle it "Your Laugh for the Day", but I quote, "E very genera tion has its historical milestone. J.S.

Woodsworth persuaded MacKenzie King to legislate Unemployment Insurance and Old Age Pensions; T.C. Dougla s gave us Medicare; John Diefenbaker gave us the Canadian Bill of Rights; Lester Pearson gave us the national flag; Trudeau gave us our national anthem and is planning to give us our Canadian Constitution. When the dust has sett led , however, posterity will remember how Ed Br oadbent won resource control for the west." Now if that isn't an opportunistic and totally incred ib le statement to be made by the Member of Parliament for Dauphin constituency, it's unbelievable.

We always had resource control in the west before this proposed federal package. it's not a question of somebody giving it to us, it's a question of stopping somebody from taking it away from us and Ed Br oadbent isn't the man who will do it. lt's the Premiers and the people of this country who are violently opposed to that proposition that are going to stop the Prime Minister from taking resources away from the provinces. lt has nothing to do with Ed Br oadbent. Mr.

Speaker, I suggest to you that we would be doing this country a great deal better service if we got off these blind alleys that we are being taken down by the federal hype campaign. You know, you have seen the billboards that say your Constitution, make it right, make it better, make it ours, all those slogans, and get on to the matter of patriation, yes, but how?

And protection of human rights, yes, we're in fav our of it but how are you best going to accomplish it because I suggest to you that if you asked people in this province and across this country the question, are you in favour of the best possible protection tor your human rights and fr eedoms?

They would say, yes, but as the Member for lnkster indicated, that best possible protection already exists under our present democratic parliamentary system of govern ment in Canada and we don't want somebody to take it away from us and that's the whole pointed issue in this whole debate and it's time we got on to that issue. Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I've talked a lot about these interesting things.

I haven't covered all the exciting things because they are already in the Throne Speech but just in case the mem bers opposite need some refreshing, we are talking about resource development in this province at a level which has never been seen before in this province. We're talking about using our hydro-electric energy as a primary instrument of economic development in this province, not using it merely as a means of creating jobs on the public payroll and increasing our hydro rates at the expense of all Manitobans.

We're talking about taking that energy, taking that readily available renewable energy and using it as a primary instru ment of economic devel opment to attr act energy intensive industries like Alcan, not only a smelter, but for aluminum castings, like production of hydrogen and all those things that will create millions of dollars of private investment and jobs. Jobs for Manitobans, that's what we're talking about. Mr. Speaker, the exciting developments go on and on and on. The western electric power grid , the rapeseed crushing plant the CSB are putting in at Harrowby, the gasohol and all those things.

I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that this is a very positive Throne Speech. This is a Throne Speech that looks to the future and tells Manitobans that there are better things to come. it's a Throne Speech that I am proud to support and, Mr. Speaker, I commend it to all members of the House. Thank you very much. li\IIR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Mem ber for Churchill. li\IIR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As always it's a pleasure to participate in this, the first major event of any legislative session.

Of course, I welcome your reappointment to your high office within these Chambers and give you once again a pledge that I will attempt to continue to work together with you in order to maintain the order, the decorum and the digni ty of these Cham bers and, as in the past number of years, I wilL from time to time, welcome your advice and welcome your protection from the members opposite. it looks as, if this year, Mr. Speaker, I can offer you my protection from the members opposite from occasion to occasion also.

I give you assurance that I will do that to uphold the dignity and the honour of your office and to ensure that you are able to partici pate in your role as capably as is possible. I believe that role, Mr. Speaker, of maintaining the dignity and decorum of this office .is going to be a bit more difficult this year because there is a theory and thesis and I think it's well accepted that the partisanship of politicians increases as does the proximity to an election.

I think that what we have witnessed on Monday of this week, the unusual events of the mem bers stand ing to attack pers onalities more than anything else, to attack people more than policies, principles and programs is only indicative of the type of Session that we are going to have. I, Sir, look forward to working in these Chambers to provide the type of legislation which is beneficial to Manitobans but I do not look forward to that type of Session, so I hope that we have seen the worse of it and that it will get better from now on.

But I think there is a reason for that sort of action on behalf of the members opposite and that is, they find themselves in a curious position. They should be defending their record of three years but it is an indefensible record. They are unable to defend that record and they are able only to attack personalities, so we will need more goodwill than usual and ! think that it is only appropriate, given the season of the year and the fact that we are fast approaching Christmas, that we make that pledge of goodwill and !, Sir, am honoured to be able to make it to you at this time.

While speal<ing to you directly, Mr. Speaker, I hope that you can take into considera tion the sound system or the Minister of Government Services can take into consideration the sound system and some of the problems that we are experiencing with it. it 108

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 makes it somewhat more difficult to perform our functions here. I noticed toda y I had the earphone plugged in and all of a sudden we had a screeching hum which I think was uncomfortable if not painful to most of us. I just encourage whatever efforts can be made to ensure that that sound system does in fact be improved. I would also like to offer the customar y congratulations to the mover, the seconder of the Throne Speech. lt was a pleasure to hear them speak and I look forward to hearing them more often during this Session than in the past.

Having said the customary and the expected, I'd like to immediately discuss the Throne Speech. I believe, Sir, that the significance of this Throne Speech is mor e one of omis sion tha n what it contains. I believe that it is a parody on a Throne Speech at best, and at worst , it is an em pty document that lacks any sort of concrete economic analysis or concrete analysis of the social problems which face all of us as Manilobans, as Canadians and as legislators.

Because they have not addressed the problems or the issues, it is impossible for them to come up with the solutions and so we have a Throne Speech that is subsequently void of any sort of comprehensive planning or any type of overall strategy which it ·is incumbent upon the government to provide in a Throne Speech. What they have attempted to do with this particular speech, I believe, is to camouflage it with grandiose plans, the mega projects about which we hear so much.

They tell us that we should shar e their hope; that we should share their optimism and that if we don't share that hope and optimism that these projects are going to come to pass very shortly, then we are in some way· doing a disservice to the people of this province. Well, I will tell them, Mr. Speaker, that not only do we not shar e all of their hope and all of their optimism, but neither does the public share that hope and that optimism. They are not fooled by the sweet talk and the sugar coatings of a Throne Speech that is virtually empty of any substance.

They have been fooled or perhaps they haven't been fooled but they have certainly seen the bird-i n-the bush oHer of the government on numerous occasions past and they are not going to be fooled by it this time. You know, we have heard it all before, the grandiose plans. the mega projects, the bright sunny days, blue skies budgets, we've heard it in other Throne Speeches. We've heard it in the Pollyanna budgets that they have brought to bear, that have not bo;ne fruit and we are conditi oned to the disappointment that we have experienced from time to time.

I hope that you will pardon our scepticism but I do believe it to be earned and I believe, Sir, that even our disbelief might be earned . At this point I think it's important to address some of my remarks to the contribution just made by the Member for River Heights in the Throne Speech. I welcome him to this, what he considers to be his first active role in the Throne Speech Debate.

I would just, without trying to analyse and discuss all the points he brought forward in his speech, try to disabuse him of a misconception tha t he apparently has and that is that his government was the first government to provide CEDF loans to the Treaty Indian people in Manitoba. lt was his government that took that right away from the Treaty Indian people of Manitoba and then subsequently under pressure from the Treaty Indian people and under pressure from their friends and under pressure from this side of the House was forced to reinstate that ri ght.

So in fact, Sir, -(I nterject ion)- and the Member for Rupertsland does correct me and he says that they have only reinstated it partially and that is a fact So what we have in tha! instance, for the Mem ber of River Height's edifica tion, is a situation that is worse as far as the Treaty Indian people of this province are concerned than it was three years ago, and I think he should be made aware of that so that he does not make that mistake again. ! believe, Sir, given the reaction and the actions on the gover nment side, tha t we can only make the assumption that they are in fact aware of exactly what their Throne Speech is, and as well, they are aware of what it isn't.

And they're embarrassed by it all. And I think that's why they had to resort to the embarrass ing behaviour of Monday, which only acted to further discredit an already weak Throne Speech. it was not to their benefit to have done that, but having done that I think they have only indicated that they are in fact extremely embar rassed by it all.

And they will continue to suffer that embar rassme nt because there is certainly more to come, until they suffer the ultimate embar rassment, in not so short a time I hope, of losing the next election, of having thrown away the largest electoral majority in this province since the early 19 0Us, by exactly the type of actions, and exactly the type of rhetoric and verbiage that we saw in the Throne Speech of a couple of days ago. And they should not only be embarr assed by those fa ilures, they should be shamed by those failures.

They should be shamed because they have been unable to create the type of economic climate, and all . due credit to them, Sir, in which they very strongly believe, and in which I believe, they very strongly want. So giving them that motivation, which I think is an honourable motivation, Sir, I among others, and the people of this province, I can assure you, are extremely disappointed with their latest effort At best it is a fuzzy rendition oi the First Minister's personal philosphyo An 18 th century approach to government, the usual co mbi nation of laissez-faire economics and right-wi ng social policies.

A First Minister who is suspicious of any progressive group and by that suspicion cuts himself away and isolates himself from a good portion of the population. But that is the yoke they carry. That's their albatross and I assume they're willing to carry it The Jeykll and Hyde mixture, Sir, of Adam Smith and Rona!d Reagan, if I may: And I believe, Sir, in all due respect, that that is what is going to cost them that largest electoral majority in many years in this province.

I know it has given them a speech which is plagued with the usuai vagueness, in both approach and in language, a tragedy ot a document, Sir, that lacks the analysis and is an avoidance of problem stating, and thereby problem solving. And there are serious problems in the Province of Manitoba, and in all fairness to members opposite, they are not all problems of their own making. Many of them, Sir, are national in scope, for which we have to thank a Li beral federal government, who has been able to

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 correspondingly mismanage the Canadian economy as much as the Conservative govern ment in this province have been able to mismanage our own economy. But some of them go beyond that, some of them are global in scope and in origin, and so we cannot blame the gov ernment for them because they are going to spill over into the economy of Manitoba, regardless of whichever government is in power at any given time.

But we can, Sir, assess and blame for having failed to lessen the impact of those problems on the people of Manitoba, tor having failed to put in place the type of countermeasures that are necessar y to deal with problems which originate from outside our borders. And I will give them credit that the role of the province is limited in this respect, but they have failed even to live up to that limited role.

Inflation was a subject which they brought to the attention of the government when the sides within this House were switched, time and time again, as if the provincial government had a role to play in the infla tionar y process that was taking place, and perhaps, Sir, t he provincial government does have a role to play to attempt in some way to lessen the impact, but we know that inflation in Manitoba today, is as high, or is higher than in many other provinces and many other cities, and I'd like to place that remark in the northern context.

Because, Sir, while inflation is an onerous burden tor any working family to carry in the Pr ovince of Manitoba, it is especially onerous tor those of the north. The figures are not as accurate as I would hope them to be, but I have been informed that it costs appro xima tely 22 a month more to feed a family of four in northern Manitoba than it does in southern Manitoba. So you can see right there that the impact of rising food pric es on people in the north is going to be significantly greater than the impact on people in the south.

So they have refused to come up with any sort of initiative or innovative programs to deal with that, whether it be in the northern context or the southern context. They've sat on their hands. But, Sir, if the wages that the working people of this province were being paid, were able to keep up with the inflation and the increases in the cost of living, then perhaps they could be a little more lackadaisical in their actions in regard to dealing with inflation. But wages have increased less in this province than in most provinces. We are the only province with net out­ migration.

And I direct your attention again to the northern context of Gill am and Chur chill, two communities, Sir, which are suffering, those tragic effects of out-migration, that accompany a loss of population and we will go into some detail on tha t thr oughout this session and perhaps later in this Throne Speech if time permits. But th ose people who are leaving this province, Sir, are not only the northerners but they are the young and the skilled, because they are the most highly mobile people in our society. They are the people who are able to leave when the economy deteriorates.

And we have in tact, families being torn apart because this government is refusing to take the type of comprehensive, and the type of positive action which it is incumbent upon them to take. And I don't say that without specifics in mind, Mr. Speaker. I had a young man, a man my own age, perhaps a little bit younger, come to my . house the other day and say that he was having to travel to the Yukon to get a job because he'd lost his job in northern Manitoba and he was having to leave his family behind. There are very real personal tragedies that are resulting from this government's inability to govern.

And today, in the question period, and I can assure you in many question periods to follow and thr oughout this Sessi on, we dis cussed plant dis closur es and layoffs . And they continue, Sir, unaba ted . We can again refer to the northern context of Thompson, and the layoffs that we had at lnco, when this government first came in power, a slap in the face to this government, who had come in power. I remember the rumours that circulated and percolated through the mine in Thompson before the last elec tion.

They said you know if a New Democratic Party government is elected to office in the Pr ovince of Manitoba, ther e will be massive layoffs in this mine. And we weren't elected. We were not elected and there were massive layoffs at lnco. And if, Sir, if tha t isn't a reje ction of the government's policies, I don't know what is. But in tact we are seeing lnco operation in Thompson, closed down this summer, for a period of time, because of the type of economic climate that has been created , not only in this province, but throughout the Canadian context. So they are ignoring the plant closures.

They're refusing to acknowledge them in some instances. We found out today that the Minis ter of Economic Development and the Minis ter of Labour are not even consulting on a formal basis to try to develop a strategy, to protect the interests of Manitoba and to protect the interests of the workers involved. So we see tha t they do very little in that respect. And th ose layoffs and closu res are crea ting sign ificant problems, social problems, Sir, that extend throughout the entire economy. And we've talked about them before, we'll talk about them again.

But I'll tell you the Throne Speech did not talk about them. The Throne Speech did not mention the layoffs. The Throne Speech did not mention measures that might be taken to ameliorate some of the problems that are created by that type of unemployment. No, no, Sir, they are ignoring it and continuing to ignore it. And the environmental quality of this province continues to deteriorate, again it is a problem that is not entirely of the provincial government's making, but let them take more positive action than they have taken. Let them show more initiative than they have taken to date.

Let them be more innovative in their approach. And they refuse that responsibility, Sir, and tor that we all suffer. Within the workpla ces the mselv es, workers continue to suf fer accidents and oc cupational illnesses, and yet we have a reference to workplace safety and health in the Throne Speech, and it consists of one very vague line. They have one line, workplace safety and health in their Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker. And I can suggest that that only shows a lack of commitment to the type of programs which are so obviously necessary.

And we have seen the lack of initiative in respect to northern problems, Sir. There have been some 11 0

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 suggestions, and they're little more than suggestions in the Throne Speech, that action is going to be taken. But, in fact, they do very little to deal with the types of problems that northerners face, and here I will differ with my earlier statements. Many of the problems that northerners face are brought on because of the provincial government.

They have to bear the responsibility, because their treatment of northern Manitoba has isolated that part of the province from the rest of the provi nce and has alienated the people in northern Manitoba, to an extent that has not been seen before for many, many decades, Mr. Speaker, and I know of what I talk, because these people have come to me and they have told me about those problems and we will discuss that, throughout the debate.

The list of what they have failed to do, the list of their failures to react positively is too long for one speech but I wanted to put on the record a series of what I consider to be significant problems. The government has options. lt has ways of dealing with these types of problems. They are legislative in nature, some. Some are regulatory in natur e; some are the devel opment of suppor t mech anisms; programs and policies.

Yet this government, because of their lai ssez-f aire attitude, because they are locked in an ideological time war, refuse to provide that type of leadership, refuse to provide progressive policies and programs and for that we all suffer. They have consistently refused to develop an active interface with society, Sir, on behalf of the citizens of the province. The First Minister, his colleagues on the Cabinet bench, the members opposite, sit on their hands, Mr . Speaker, and with a Trudea u-like shrug of the sho.ulders, they cast Manitobans to the winds of fortune. They tell them to rearrange their priorities.

Less fresh food on the table. Less meat on the table. Let them eat less of the good products, if necessary let them join the breadlines; at least the families will be together, if we are to believe the stories that have been in the media recently. Mr. Speaker, there's a new movie in town, oh I don't know how new it is, I just saw it the other night. lt's called "One Trick Pony" .

And what it is about is a rock and roll singer, who is very popular in the '60s and in the '80s refuses to change his style or his technique and because of that is driven from the business because he only knew the one trick, the hard ral!nchy, rock and roll .. And because he was unwilling or unable, as it may be, to meet the demands of the new audiences of the '80s, he had to stop doing what he knew best. This government, Sir, is a "One Trick Pony" government. Let the private sector do it, that's all they know. Let the private sector do it.

Don't tamper with the engine that fuels the economy, Sir, and like the rock and roll singer, because they refuse to meet the challenge of the '80s, and if there's one thing obvious from the Throne Speech, it is that, they do refuse to meet the challenge of the '80s. They will be dr iven from the government. (Int erjection)- The Minister responsible for Government Services says, oh no, but then let him prove it, Sir.

Let him prove it by developing the type of policy and programs, which will in fact meet the type of problems that we face today. lt's time, customarily, to reflect on the events of the past year, and in this case, the past three years, during a Throne Speech debate. lt allows us the opportunity, I hope and I anticipate, Mr . Speaker, to discuss that in the context of the Throne Speech before us. And I w ould like to, Sir, talk about some of the problems that they avoid and discuss some options and possible solutions.

Because while we do not accept what they have done, we do believe that we can provide them with some insight, and the benefit of our advice, and they can reject it if they will and if they wish. But the fact is I feel responsibility to provide them with the type of advice which may in fact, help them become a better government, because we are going to have to live under this government for at least a few more months. And I'd like to direct specific attention to a number of specific areas which are indicative of the type of problems that we face and may provide examples and lessons on how to deal with those.

Inflation and wages, of course, is one that affects every individual in the Province of Manitoba. The health and safety of our workers in the workplaces, is another issue which I think should bear some discussion in this debate. The protection of the environment, is another area. And of course conditions in northern Manitoba is another concern which is going to be broug ht forward.

I will bri ng forward many of these concerns, and my other colleagues; of course; will bring forward other concerns because there is not enough time in one Throne Speech to address yourself to all the issues to which you might wish to speak, as the Member for River Heights indicate� in his speech. But let us examine the area of wages and salaries and inflation very briefly and let us put it in a very specific context, Mr . Sp eaker, and tha t is the minimum wage earner, the low wage earner, because the test of any government is how it treats the less strong segments of its society.

That is a test, and the minimum wage earner is a classic example because they lack economic clout, because they are for the most part unorganized and therefore lack the power of the union behind them, and for those reasons they need special attention from the government. lt is the Tories that have turned their back so obviously on the low wage earners in this province. Because working poor, minimum wage earners, low wage earners, they're all int er-rel ated. You can't keep the minimum wage arbitrarily and artificially low as they have and not have that effect extend throughout all of the low wage economy.

Since September 1s t, 19 76 which was the last change increase in the minimum wage under the New Democratic Party Gover nment, there has been less than a seven percent increase in minimum wage earnings for Manitobans. But at that same time, during that same peri od, the cost of living has increased by over 40 percent. So what we see is a significant drop in the standard of living. We see in fact the minimum wage earners suffer a standard of living that is reduced by a full one-qu arter because of the government's refusal to provide them with a decent wage. They are worse off, Mr.

Speaker, in both relative and absolute terms. Manitoba has lost its previous standing tha t it held in regard to the minimum wages in other provinces, 111

Wednesday, 17 December, 1980 about which this government used to boast I might add. They would say, what's the problem,