Manitoba Hansard — 26 May 1982 (Sitting 62, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-62

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Peti tions ... Reading and Receiving Petitions ... PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COM MITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Flin Flon. MR. J. STORIE: Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Wolseley that the report of the Committee be received. MOTION presented and carried.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I would ask leave to make a non-political statement. MR. SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave? (Agreed) The Honourable Member for Niakwa. NON-POLITICAL STATEMENT MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the Honourable Members of the Legislature, I am respon sible for the tomato plants on your desk.

I just wanted all of the members who represent all of the people of the Province of Manitoba to know that these tomato plants were grown in the Province of Manitoba and they are what they refer to as Fantastic. They're not blueberry bushes, they are tomato plants and they are Fantastic. They will mature in 65 days and for those that have any American background, on July 4 you'll be able to eat tomatoes. These are Manitoba-grown tomatoes. Thank you very much. MR. SPEAKER: Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports ... Notices of Motion ... Introduction of Bills ... INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR.

SPEAKER: Before we reach Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of members to the gallery where we have 24 students of Grades 11 and 12 standing of the Fogo Island High School from Newfoundland, guests of Springfield Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Zuk. There are also 30 students of Grade 5 standing of the Heritage Elementary School under the direction of Mr. Walter Shurrow. The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. There are 30 students of the R.J. Waugh School under the direction of Mr. Grant.

The school is in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Gladstone. There are 35 students of Grade 7 and 8 standing from the Gretna Elementary School under the direc tion of Mr. John Brown and Mr. D. Reimer. These students are in the school from the constituency of the Honourable Member for Rhineland. On behalf of all of the members here, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. HON. S. LYON: Mr. Speaker, a question to the First Minister.

I wonder if the First Minister could bring the House up-to-date with respect to any progress report on negotiations with I MC for the mooted potash mine in western Manitoba which was well under way, the negotiations were well under way when he came into office on the 30th of November? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I sense that the Leader of the Opposition is asking for updating from the previous report that was given by the Minister responsible for Mines and Energy and so that report can be fuller, I would prefer to take the question as notice on behalf of the Minister for him to give the Leader of the Opposition a report upon his return. HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, could the First Minister advise in a general sense - and I appreciate what he's saying about the detail - could he advise in a general sense as to whether or not there has been any measu rable progress in the achievement of a potash mine for Manitoba, given the fact that apparently IMC's Letters of Intent were allowed to expire on the 15th of December, 1981? Is there any hope that the First Min ister or his colleagues can offer that this matter is now back on track? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, it's my information the Acting Minister does have some information. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHR OEDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes indeed, negotiations are still ongoing and just one bit of information that I don't believe has been made public to date is that the results of the testing which had been done over the past year or so are in and there's an indication that the quality of the ore is much better than had originally been expected; that it's in the neighbourhood of 22 percent K20 and, of course, we're quite happy with that.

That would indicate, of course, in terms of the decision to proceed or not to proceed, that it would weigh more on the side of pro- 2742

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 ceeding than not proceeding. As the Leader of the Opposition has indicated, the Letter of Intent did indeed expire on December 15, 1981 but at that same time, I believe on the 15th or 16th, a letter went out from our negotiators to IMC indicating that although we knew the Letter of Intent had expired, that we were still quite interested in neg otiating and, in fact, talks were going on as late as about a week ago, which is the last information I have as a member of the Mega Projects Committee. HON. S. LYON: Mr.

Speaker, the report that the Min ister gives with respect to the grade of the ore material on the IMC lease site is encouraging, indeed. It's a continuation of the information that we had been receiving for the past year-and-a-half or so through the company. Can the Minister advise the status of the exploration and/or other activities that are going on on the North portion of that field, the rights to which were sold to AMAX Corporation in order that they might explore the possibility of a second potash mine in Manitoba? HON. V. SCHR OEDER: I would have to take that question as notice, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker. my question is to the Honourable Minister of Community Services and I would ask him, in view of the Minister's removal of a highly qualified civil servant from the post of Manager of the Westbran Work Activity Project, and his replacement by a non-qualified friend of the Minister, and the obvious patronage involved, what are the Min ister's intentions with respect to the other Work Activ ity Projects and Employment Services co-ordinator positions in the other regions of Manitoba? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Com munity Services. HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, obviously the member didn't hear my remarks yesterday and that is that we intend to try to make the Work Activity Projects more meaningful than they have been in the last few years. In other words, we want to put more welfare recipients who are employable into a work training program and we want to do that at a reasonable cost, not 12,000 a year, which incidentally is double what it costs to put an engineering undergraduate through the University of Manitoba in the year 1981.

Our intention is to do what we can to make them more meaningful, and part of that process is to make the managers separate from the function of Regional Employment Co-ordinator. This is a process that's under way and, hopefully, it will result in greater productivity. As I said yesterday, Mr.

Speaker, if it doesn't result in more productivity, and I think that's something that the taxpayers and the representatives of the taxpayers should be interested in, then we'll have to look at ways and means of chang ing these projects to make them far more meaningful than they are at the present time, such as, a subsidy program to industry whereby these trainees could work directly for small enterprises, for example, rather 2743 than in landscaping projects or whatever. MR. L. SHERM AN: Mr.

Speaker, given the Minister's professed concern for, and anxiety about productivity and cost effectiveness and low client volumes, etc., in the Work Activity Project spectrum, is the Minister suggesting to the House that these problems are to be remedied by expanding the administrative bureau cracy?

Is that his answer to low client volume in the Work Activity Projects rather than working at building up that volume if, indeed, it's a justifiable project to begin with; that he believes it should be remedied and approached by expanding the administrative bureau cracy in creating five new administrative jobs, all of which are contrived jobs? HON. L. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, that is not the case. The function of the employment coordinators is to refer welfare recipients to various kinds of job oppor tunities, including those that are presented by Work Activity Projects and those presented by private enterprise.

That is their main function and that is what, essentially, they are paid for. That is what they will do perhaps and, hopefully, on a more broad scale in order to try to put welfare recipients on the payroll both of private enterprise and, in some cases, on the payroll of the Work Activity Projects. I want to emphasize it just in case the member is not aware of it, but Mr. Wark, whom the individual member seems to be concerned with, is not being demoted.

He remains in the department and as the member indi cated yesterday his classification is under review: that classification has nothing to do directly necessarily with the Work Activity Project effort. MR. L. SHERM AN: Mr.

Speaker, on the contrary, that is not the main function of the Employment Services Co-ordinator as outlined by the Minister and he knows full well that the functions are dual, they're 50-50 functions: the kinds of referrals and employ ment services co-ordination he's talking about and the management of the Work Activity Project, recon firmed by his own department and his own audit car ried out by his own personnel branch. Mr.

Speaker, my question then to the Minister is whether his professed concern for the taxpayer is countered and addressed through dividing those positions in all five regions outside of Winnipeg region in Manitoba and seeking to fill those positions with political friends? HON. L. EVANS: I reject the observations of the hon ourable member, obviously. I want to say this, Mr.

Speaker, that if we are going to get more effective action on the part of Work Activity Projects, it's my view and it's the view of senior people in my depart ment, that it would be advantageous to split these responsibilities in order to get more throughput at lower cost per participant. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I direct my question to the Minister of Natural Resources and would ask the Minister whether the report which was

Wednesday, 26 1982 commissioned by the government on the wild rice industry, the contract which was given to the former Member for Rupertsland, Mr. Bost rum, I wonder if the Minister could inform the House whether or not he has received that report as yet. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I'm delighted to indicate that that report was received. It has been perused. It's still a subject of examination by officials in the department.

I have had extensive meetings with interest groups; people interested in the industry and those discussions and reviews are ongoing. MR. R. BANMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, a supple mentary question to the Minister. I wonder if he could inform the House whether or not he will be making that report public. HON. A. MACKLING: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that all reports received will be made public. I don't think that it is vital at this time. Certainly it will be available to any interested MLA.

I haven't considered tabling that documentation, but it is a matter of public record and if the honourable member wants a copy or anyone else interested wants a copy, they'll be furnished. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DR IEDGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister then. First of all, I'd like to indicate the desire to have a copy if possible. A question to the Minister, can the Minister indicate whether he's pro cessing any new applications for leases on lakes for the production of wild rice? HON. A. MACKLING: No, Mr.

Speaker, it is not our intention to process new leases for new lakes. The policy in connection with existing leases is one that there'll be a meeting with public interest groups shortly and there'll be a policy position, or policy statement given in due course. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Mr. Speaker, to the same Minister then. Is the Minister indicating that there is a possibil ity of renewing renewal of leases for people who pres ently have leases on certain lakes for the production of wild rice? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, the question of the renewal of existing leases is one that I will be making a public statement on in due course. MR. A. DR IEDGER: A supplementary to the same Minister, could the Minister then indicate to the House whether the people who have leases at the present time will be given consideration in view of the fact that they have invested in seeding lakes and drainage pro jects that they've undertaken, that their interests will be kept in mind when the Minister makes his announcement? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, the honourable member I'm certain would appreciate that those observations have been made to me and to my col leagues and, of course, those arguments and those suggestions will be borne in mind in any policy deci sion we make. MR. SPE AK ER: The Honourable Member for Roblin-Russell. MR. W. McKENZIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister can advise the House if he's been able to arrest the indiscriminate hunting practice of moose and elk that's taking place in Duck Mountain Provincial Park. HON. A.

MACKLING: Well, Mr. Speaker, from time to time governments of the day, including past adminis trations, have been faced with the problems of the slaughter of animals out of season and, of course, it's an ongoing problem. I think poaching of fish and animals has been recorded in history from the time that animals were considered to be in the public domain and that's an ongoing problem.

It's one that we are addressing, I hope, with the same vigour as the previous administration, perhaps with more effectiveness because we have been spend ing more money in the area of co-ordinating the servi ces of the conservation officers. MR. W. McKENZIE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the Minister can advise the House if these uncon trolled killing practices in the Duck Mountains which in some quarters say reduced the moose population, a hundred elk, a hundred or so, what affect will that have on the hunting licences granted next fall in the Duck Mountain Provincial Park? 2744 HON. A. MACKLING: Mr.

Speaker, I want to make it clear that I'm not accepting the base of the honour able member's question that there is uncontrolled, extensive, illegal hunting. There's obviously some illegal hunting or illegal poaching goes on in every era. I don't think it is out of control; I think that there have been instances but I don't think they're such as to warrant the kind of alarmist words that the honourable member is using in his questions. MR. W. McKENZIE: I wonder then, Mr.

Speaker, will the Minister get in touch with, or call a meeting of, the Manitoba Federation of Game and Fish Associations and Game and Fish in Roblin, Russell, Grandview, who are most concerned about some of the things that are taking place and sit down with them and see if they can't come up with a solution to the problem? HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the presence of members of Game and Fish Associations to my office and I've done that on a very extensive basis.

I've had a number of meetings with Game Asso ciation people from all parts of the province and when they have concerns we will respond to them. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Tuxedo. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My ques-

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 tion is for the Minister of the Environment. I wonder if the Minister can explain why, in the case of a toxic chemical spill in the Transcona area yesterday, it apparently took 75 minutes for his department to have an environmental officer at the scene to assist in the safe handling of the spilled material? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. J.

COWAN: What I can provide to the Member for Tuxedo is a report on that incident and try to explain to him the procedures that are in place and some of the actions that we are taking in respect to responses which are necessary in incidents like this. Of course there was a spill yesterday at approxi mately 11 :12 a.m., of a liquid fertilizer. Approximately 5,500 litres of this fertilizer ammonium nitrate and ammonium polyphosphate were spilled as a result of a truck overturning. This occurred at Ravenhurst and Pandora Avenue in East Transcona.

At 11 :12 a.m. we received a report in Environmental Control Services; at 11 :20 a.m. an environmental officer was sent to the particular site. The environmental officer arrived at the site at 12:20 a. m. and that's whe_re you find the difference in time. What you have to understand, of course, is that the environmental officer was located in the offices and had to go completely across town in order to arrive at the site.

There was -(l nterjection) Well, the members opposite tend to make light of that but it's a very serious concern of ours and I'm certain it's a very serious concern for the Member for Tuxedo, even if his colleagues don't share that serious con cern. But it is, in fact, an area which is worthy of review. Our environmental officers don't, of course, have sirens on their vehicles. They don't, of course, have the power to exceed the speed limits or to drive faster than the limits allow, so they are going to have to abide by traffic regulations as they make it from one side of town to the other.

In this instance, this did not seem to be a particular problem. The initial phone call, which was taken at the office, indicated that there was a spill; the environ mental officer said that he would attend the site. There did not seem to be any concern about him getting to the site in a hurry as a result of that phone call.

I think the Fire Department in this instance did the proper thing to wait for the environmental officer to attend the site to provide the expertise and the advice which he had and was able to provide to them in respect to the proper disposal and clean-up methods, and for that reason, I think, in this instance, things worked out relatively well in spite of the delay. However, I am concerned that in future instances, different substances may be involved and this sort of delay could, in fact, impede an effective cleanup. I must reiterate that I do not think it did so in this instance.

So what I have asked my department to do as a result of this incident is to contact the Fire Department, and they are now in the process of doing so. They have phone calls in to the Fire Chief, both the Fire Chief who was reported as having comments in the

article and other Fire Department officials, to ask for a meeting, to sit down with them to discuss ways and means by which we can ensure that a delay of this sort wouldn't have a more profoundly negative impact in the future. We take this matter very seriously and we'll be looking at ways by which we can quicken our response time. That may mean giving initial instruc tions over the phone when it is determined that those instructions are necessary, or it may mean finding some way to get a police escort to a site if it's neces sary.

But we're certainly concerned about delays which may be experienced as a result of normal traffic and distances that need to be travelled and we will sit down to attempt to work out ways by which we can respond more quickly. MR. G. FILMON: There appears to be some discre pancy between the information which the Minister has given and the testimony of the Fire Chief involved in the scene, in that it appeared from his report that it took one-half-hour for the officer to be dispatched from his office.

My question to the Minister is, did the Fire Department use the special emergency spill hot line which his department instituted earlier this year? HON. J. COWAN: I can certainly find out what partic ular phone number they called in order to direct our attention to this matter and get that information back to the member. However, whichever phone number they used, I can assure him that they had responded very quickly and had called the Environmental Man agement Division very quickly and, within eight min utes of that phone call, I am informed that an officer was dispatched.

I have every reason to believe that is the correct information, because that is the informa tion provided to me by those people who were at the scene of the receipt of the phone call and conse quently at the scene of the departure of the environ ment management officer. The Fire Chief was not at that scene and therefore I don't know how he can determine that it took one half-hour for an officer to lea ve the building. I am informed that is not the case.

I will certainly, when I've entered into discussions, or my staff have entered into discussions with that particular individual who gave that testimony - to use the words that the Member for Tuxedo used - ask him how he arrived at that conclusion. 2745 MR . G. FILMON: Just for the assistance of the Minis ter in tracing it down, the Minister indicated that the spill occurred, I believe, at 11 :12 a.m.

whereas the Fire Department Captain indicated that the call came into the Fire Department at 10:50 a.m., and obviously if the hot line was not used and there was some 20 minutes time between the time that the Fire Department was notified and the time that his department was notified, the hot line is not working as he said it would when he announced it a couple of months ago and so I think that there's a case here for the department to be concerned. HON. J. COWAN: The Fire Chief, in his report, indi cated, of course, that the spill took place at 10:50 a.m. We received a call at 11 :12 a.m.

There may, in fact, have been some time elapsed as a result of the fire department arriving at the scene. I will certainly determine more specifically for the member the chro nological actions which took place after 10:50 a.m. when the spill took place and I will report back to him.

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 I share his concern that we have to have in place more effective reporting mechanisms to ensure that environmental management people are able to attend the scene very quickly. I am not convinced, by either the

article which appeared in the paper or by his representation at this time, that this incident was one which would cause us grave concern other than it points out to us a need for ongoing and continuing communication between the different parties, which are going to be necessary at a scene of an environ mental accident, to ensure that we have the most effective means of communication in place.

I can only give him the assurance that we treat this matter with a great deal of seriousness and that we are going to continue to improve upon the mechanisms which we have in place until such a time as we are satisfied, until such a time as other parties are satis fied, and I can give him the assurance until such a time that he is satisfied, that we in fact. have in place a program which will allow for the fastest and most effective use of environmental management person nel when a spill such as this occurs. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J. DOWN EY: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture. In view of the press report today in the Winnipeg Free Press, the Minister indi cates that there'll be a major shake-up of the Depart ment of Agriculture to implement a central control mechanism within the department which would be close to the Cabinet, who does he propose to fire from the Department of Agriculture, and who does he pro pose to replace those individuals with, to become that Central Planning Agency, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUS KI: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the honourable member for his question. It appears that the reporter may have been at the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce monthly meeting slightly ahead of time for that and attended well into the happy hour before the dinner in order to make the state ments that he has made, Mr. Speaker. I have a copy of my remarks that I made at the meeting in which I spoke to the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, my copy of the remarks I have here, Mr. Speaker. I really don't know where that reporter could have received such an impression.

In fact the reorgan ization of the department, which was raised in the House here sometime ago and which I commented on indicating that what we wanted to do, with respect to the reorganization, was to separate the central func tions of the department dealing with various services and the regional services so there could be a closer liaison and closer working relationship between those two groups, so that services could be provided in a direct manner to the farmers of Manitoba. l\1r.

Speaker, all I can say with respect to that com ment, someone must have been at that happy hour for quite a length of time before my remarks. MR. J. DOWN EY: Mr. Speaker, I think the Honourable Minister has made some serious accusations about a member of the press who is well-known in the farm community and within the circles of reporting for the farm community. Can the Minister substantiate and prove the statement he has made, that the individual was at the happy hour and has put his report forward while being under the influence of being at a happy hour too long?

Can he substantiate and prove that for the farm community? -(Interjection)- Say so out side the House and make those same comments. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I not only will table my remarks to the honourable member that I made - I have a copy of the speech here - but I will quote from the speech which I gave with respect to marketing boards if the honourable member wants and I will read it to the honourable member. Mr.

Speaker, I quote from my speech where I indicated to the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce where I said: "I sincerely appreciate your responsible approach to assessing the problems related to agricultural mar keting agencies with supply management powers. You are no doubt aware that these have been sub jected during the past few years to strongly one-sided negative criticism. You realize that our government supports the use of marketing boards, as necessary, to improve the bargaining position of producers.

I know that if they were to abuse these powers they could adversely affect the public interest including the welfare of agriculture-related businesses as well as consumers. You can rest assured that the Manitoba Natural Products Marketing Council will fulfill its supervisory role better than it has in the past few years because it will be provided with increased research capability in the near future." Those were the comments, Mr. Speaker, that I made directly with reference to the marketing boards.

I should indicate that I, during question period, was asked about the reorganization of the department in which I made comments along the line that I have made to the honourable member, at the time where I indicated in this House and in reply to the question with respect to the functions within the department; nothing in a shade close to resembling a matter of policy direction coming from Cabinet. Frankly, Mr.

Speaker, I believe that government as a whole should have a central function in terms of plan ning approach to the various departments and co ordinated approach in planning, rather than each department going off on its own. But, Mr. Speaker, I had not made those corn ments at that time and I made no reference to that. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, it may have appeared that the Honourable Minister had been at the happy hour somewhat prior to the member of the press that he's referring to, and his memory is somewhat a little bit in the state .. . MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

Would the Honourable Minister of Agriculture state his point of order. 2746 HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I did not accuse somebody of doing something. I assumed that member of the press was and could have been somewhere because how coul_d he interpret my remarks the way he did. Mr. Speaker, my point of privilege is, the

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 member was not there at the time that I made those remarks, I came to the meeting and I left fairly early because I had a funeral to attend in the evening, Mr. Speaker, and I ask him to withdraw those comments. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr.

Speaker, on the point of order, I do not plan to withdraw those comments because he has made a statement in here making an inference to a member of the media and the press, that individual is not able to protect himself or herself, and I would hope he would be man enough to make those same state ments outside the House as he has made in the House, or make an apology publicly in the Legislature. A further question, Mr. Speaker, what research and backup information does the Minister have to make such statements as this, that he says the marketplace has had the worst effect in distorting prices.

In other words, another comment he made that I know, "that federal policies in open market wheeling and dealing were causing more economic and trade distortions than marketing boards, Uruski has said." What backup documentation and research work has the Minister done to be able to justify those kinds of statements? Could he also provide that information? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, in terms of the entire

article - I won't even go into the contents because most of the

article with respect to comments about federal and provincial relations and the like, was not accurately quoting my remarks. But with respect to the comments of the marketplace distorting the pri ces, all that one has to look at is the relationship of the last few years of grain prices rising on the world market as related to the price of land, and the market place distorting the whole scenario in terms of the agriculture production and the price of land, Mr. Speaker. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary to the Minister. Does he plan to put price controls on land?

Is that what he's telling us he's planning to do? Is he going to put price controls on the farmlands in the province? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, at least now the Hon ourable Member for Arthur acknowledges that the way the cost-price escalation in agriculture for new people entering agriculture is nigh on impossible for young people entering that industry. He now at least, admits that it is nigh on impossible for new people to enter agriculture the way the escalation of prices have gone and especially of the resource of land. We need new people into agriculture.

We have to allow for the transition of new people, Mr. Speaker, not close up options to new people. In fact, those people who were forced to purchase land by the changes in the lease agreements that the former administration made are now those same people who are in grave difficulty because they have levered themselves to such a great extent that they are having great difficulty in repaying those loans and are in financial trouble, Mr. Speaker. MR. SP EAKE R: The Honourable Member for Assiniboia. MR. R. NORD MAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Environment.

With the establishment of a sewage lagoon on Shoal Lake in the vicinity of the outlet to the source of fresh water to the City of Win nipeg, can the Minister confirm that there is no detri mental threat to the water supply, and can he tell us what his department has done to assure us that there will be clean water supply to better than half the popu lation of the Province of Manitoba? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. J.

COWAN: Well, I certainly can't assure the honourable membe rt hat there would be no detrimen tal impact of a sewage lagoon being established at that site if, in fact, one is being established. I have heard much of the same information, perhaps more than the honourable member and others in respect to this particular situation. I have asked my department to contact different jurisdictions in respect to beginning to initiate a response to any suggestion of the construction of a sewage lagoon in that area. They have done so.

We are now looking at the options which are available to us if, in fact, a sewage lagoon is anticipated in that area. I can assure the member that we will be taking all the appropriate actions which are available to us if, in fact, the rumour which he has heard as well as others, proves to be substantiated. We are quite concerned about the water supply of the City of Winnipeg, as we are quite concerned about the quality of water throughout this province.

As Min ister responsible for the Environment, I can assure him that we will respond quickly and comprehensively to any suggested activity which may, in fact, have a detrimental impact on the water supply or may have a potential for a detrimental impact on the water supply in the future. 2747 So we have entered into discussions with other jurisdictions, including the Federal Government, in respect to this matter. We will continue those discus sions.

We will also be talking to the parties directly affected in the very near future to clarify their inten tions in this regard and we will be taking all that action which is appropriate in respect to ensuring the protec tion of the water supply which he is concerned about as well as most of Manitoba. MR. R. NOR DMAN: Mr. Speaker, I believe it is more than just rumour. I believe that the Chief - Herb West, I believe it is - has made the statement on the radio that this is happening. HON. J.

COWAN: Yes, I understand that Chief Herb Red Sky has, in fact, made some public comments respecting the construction on the sewage lagoon. We are now, as I indicated earlier, taking what I believe to be the appropriate reaction in response and, that is, getting in contact with the Chief. We are not limiting ourselves to that activity, we are also initiating and maintaining contact with other jurisdictions who may, in fact, have some authority in this regard or who may be able to provide us with advice which may enable us to better respond to this situation; we will continue to do so.

I can give the member the assurance that we are going to do everything that is within the power and the purview of the Provincial Government to ensure that

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 the water quality of the water supply for the City of Winnipeg is protected. There are options which are available to us. There are options which we will exercise if, in fact, we believe they are necessary. I do not want to leave the impression, which he may have suggested by his sup plementary question, that we are not taking the appropriate action. We have not at this date seen any definitive evidence of construction of the sewage lagoon. We are concerned about the reports.

We are making contact with the appropriate persons and we will take the necessary action with all due haste and due speed and in a comprehensive and what I would believe would be an effective way. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Tuxedo. MR. G. FILMON: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I think I can understand now why it took a half-hour for the person to be dispatched to the scene yesterday. The call must have come into the Minister's office. My question is for the Minister of Housing. I wonder if the Minister could look into an apparent backlog in the processing of applications for the Critical Home Repair Program. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. A. MACKLIN G: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that in the context of the honourable member's question he's reflecting on the success of our promotion of this program. This program had languished in the last several years and had really been down to a trickle of activity; that activity has been renewed. I am pleased that we have a large number of applications. We haven't been spending our money like drunken sailors and hiring a large number of civil servants unneces sarily to sit and await these applications.

As the volume grows, so will the workers to handle them. MR . G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to hear the Minister's concern. This was a matter that we dis cussed in his Estimates review, and given the fact that they have spent $50,000 or $60,000 in advertising the program, it's understandable that many applications will come in.

I am told by a person who has called in with an application. and I would like the Minister to check into it, to the assertion that they are 3,000 applications behind so I think it is time perhaps that they do con sider staffing it adequately, so that applications can be processed in order for work to be done this con struction season. MR. A. MACKLI NG: Mr. Speaker, I won't confirm or deny the speculative number that the honourable member uses. I am happy that the program is being successful by the large number of applications.

We certainly will be responsible about hiring additional people, including students if that is possible in the peak periods, to facilitate the early handling of these applications. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time for Oral Ques tions having expired, Orders of the Day. ORDERS OF THE DAY ADJOURNED DEBATES ON SECOND READING MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, would you please call the adjourned debate on Bill No. 2? BILL NO. 2 - THE RESIDENTIAL RENT REGULATION ACT MR.

SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Hon ourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Bill No. 2 standing in the name of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm pleased to participate in the debate on this piece of legislation which is not only important for my consti tuency, but for most urban constituencies, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, whatever the alleged weaknesses were of our government's Arbitration Program, the fact is that under that program rent increases in Manitoba were well below those in provinces which sustained so-called stricter programs of rent controls. The Min ister's Annual Report for 1981, Mr.

Speaker, in fact confirms that, where he states on page 18 that, "There were in total, 1, 107 rent increases were arbitrated in 1981; 64 by voluntary arbitration and 1,043 by com pulsory arbitration, and approximately 88 percent of the arbitrations conducted resulted in a reduction in the rent being requested by a landlord." Mr. Speaker, this is the 1981 Annual Report signed by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, the Minister who introduced this legislation some weeks ago in this House.

This is the same Minister, of the same government, who stated in their election program that rent controls would be reintroduced to ensure affordable rental housing. Mr. Speaker, I believe that promise compared to the actual facts of what was occurring in the Province of Manitoba under the Rent Mediation and Arbitration Program, does not reflect the statement in the NDP election program, does not reflect what was actually occurring in Manitoba. We did indeed, Mr. Speaker, have a rent control program. We had an effective rent control program.

Rent increases were well below those in other jurisdictions in this country, Mr. Speaker, and that statement I think to a certain degree, was misleading to the voters of this province, many of whom were led to believe that there was no rent con trol program in Manitoba. As a result of those types of statements made in written literature and at the door in constituencies throughout this province, the new government attracted some votes I think they would not have had if people had been aware of the true situation. 2748 The political mistake that we made, Mr.

Speaker, was that we did not call our program what it really was, a Rent Control Program. I think if we had, I venture to say that there wo.uld not have been the number of changes in seats that occurred in the election last fall.

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 I could name seats in particular I think, where the types of representations that were made by the NOP allowed them to win those seats when the public was not fully aware that we did, in fact, have a Rent Control Program under our government, and a very effective one. Mr. Speaker, in fact, our Leader said during the election that if our legislation permitted unfair rent increases to occur that we would take the necessary steps to amend our legislation to prevent unfair increases. I think the record that we had during those years, Mr.

Speaker, indicates a true concern for the plight of tenants faced with unfair rent increases and this Bill now gives us another opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to discuss the most appropriate protection for tenants in the short term and the long term. Mr. Speaker, I don't intend to deal, in particular, with individual sections of this Bill. It will be dealt with in detail, section-by-section, at the Law Amendments Committee. I do say to the Minister I fear that it con tains some excessive bureaucratic control in report ing and excessive powers to officials under this legis lation.

Many of its individual provisions are difficult to accept and I believe amendments will be offered at Committee stage after Second Reading, by our side and by many members of the public who appear before the Committee to review this particular Bill. I do point out for the record too, Mr.

Speaker, that yesterday during consideration of the Estimates of the Department of the Attorney-General, the Attorney General agreed, in view of the fact that he has no committee or process in place to review legislation brought into this House in order to determine whether or not it complies with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, he agreed to review this Bill and the first contract legislation and give his assurances to the House later on that, at least, in his opinion these Bills comply with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

There are some sections of this Bill that I think have to be looked at particularly hard and those deal with certainly the powers of search and seizure in the Bill, retroactivity, the basic fairness of the legislation and whether or not it conforms with accepted principles of natural justice. So, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing from the Attorney-General with respect to this Bill, I hope before it proceeds to Committee, to receive his assu rances to its compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Mr.

Speaker, there are of course I think almost well accepted principles in this country and in other coun tries with respect to the suitability of rent controls in the short term and the long term. Many of the experts and people who have studied rent controls point out that they could have the possible effect of raising rents higher than they would otherwise go and often hurting tenants more often than they help them, as a rent-control ceiling becomes a government sanctioned minimum which landlords feel that they can impose whether they're cost warranted or not. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, it's suggested that rents may rise more rapidly than they would otherwise have because landlords are able to recover costs through rents in excess of the stated maximum but these costs without controls are often difficult to pass along where there is a competitive free market situation. More importantly, Mr. Speaker, there are long-term disadvantages of rent controls that are cited, the most important one being that they will tend to discourage new apartment construction which is the tenant's best guarantee against unreasonable rent increases.

Over the long term they tend to distort the housing market and restrict the supply and damage the quality of rental housing. Capital investment goes to other things, Mr. Speaker, when there are government-imposed limits on the rate of return, even when new apartments are not con trolled. Mr. Speaker, owners know they must compete with cheaper controlled units and they may live in fear that controls will be extended. The investors, Mr. Speaker, must be certain of get ting a reasonable rate of return.

Perhaps the Minister could indicate whether or not he, if he were in a finan cial position to invest money, would he invest in a new apartment block in Manitoba today with this piece of legislation, with rent controls? Mr.

Speaker, rent con trols it is suggested, make the situation worse over a number of years because of a lack of new construc tion; the situation becoming more and more unfair as people with ability to pay live in controlled cheaper apartments and younger people and perhaps workers moving into the Province of Manitoba are forced into new uncontrolled accommodation and have to pay rents that they cannot afford. Mr.

Speaker, a further criticism of rent controls - and I think it is perhaps a valid one with respect to this piece of legislation - is that the play of market forces is substituted with the judgment of bureaucrats. What is almost more important than what this Act says is how it will be administered and regulated by this govern ment, Mr. Speaker. The decisions the government will make under the authority of the legislation under the regulations in the administration of this Act are almost as important as the terms of this Act.

I must say, with regret, that my observation of this government to date does not inspire me to have much confidence in their ability to make wise decisions and that, Mr. Speaker, will only further inhibit the construction and supply of rental accommodation in Manitoba. 2749 Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that under the exist ing situation and the existing circumstances, the report that we have read about in the newspaper from CMHC indicates that the vacancy rates are reducing. It is apparent that there is virtually no apartment con struction coming on stream.

I believe the latest infor mation from the city indicates in fact there are abso lutely no permits issued for this type of construction in 1982 in the City of Winnipeg. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the high interest rates are virtually prohibitive to people from buying their own homes and vacating their existing apartments and moving into their own homes. There is virtually no housing starts under way in Manitoba in 1982. which would substantiate this position. We have seen, Mr.

Speaker, unprecedented layoffs and we hear more about them each day, whether it be the CNR, the CPR, the garment workers or wherever, and what we read in the newspaper, hear about on radio and see on television is only the tip of the ice berg, because more and more layoffs are occurring with employers every day in Manitoba. We see the

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 increase in bankruptcies; we see the increase in unemployment increasing dramatically; we see, Mr. Speaker, the tax burden increasing under this govern ment. The payroll tax will only further exasperate a very difficult situation for unemployment and capital investment in Manitoba. The economic plight, Mr. Speaker, of individual s in our society today in Mani toba and in particular tenants, I believe is a very dis tressing one. I'm, therefore, prepared, Mr.

Speaker, to continue to support the concept of rent controls as a short-term measure to protect tenants from unfair rent increases which might occur in these difficult economic cir cumstances which exist today under this government but, at the same time, holding the government fully responsible for the administration of this program and for developing, Mr. Speaker, a more appropriate long term solution to the problem. Mr. Speaker, rent con trols can only be a temporary measure to resolve this problem. Mr.

Speaker, the long-term solution which is required by government has to be with the objective of encou raging the construction of new rental accommodation in Manitoba. I do point out that to exclude from the control program new construction for only a four-year period is totally inadequate. This is an insufficient period of time, Mr. Speaker, for investors to recover their costs and I think the Minister is going to have to give serious consideration to extending that period of time. Mr.

Speaker, the Minister criticized the Federal Government's decision to do away with tax incentives that helped encourage new housing projects but he has offered nothing to replace those incentives. I submit to the Minister, Mr. Speaker, to the govern ment, that public housing construction will not be the answer other than for specific and limited groups of people in our society who do require that type of accommodation. What I do suggest to the Minister, Mr.

Speaker, is that he should look at the rent subsidy programs which we initiated in the Province of Mani toba and which, I think, were well regarded across Canada as being innovative and successful - the SAFER program and the SAFFR program, for exam ple, Mr. Speaker. By using and expanding rent subsidy programs, Mr. Speaker, we could get the best of both worlds. We could let the market rule and thereby encourage the private sector to invest in rental accommodations, but at the same time the government would subsidize those who are in genuine need, Mr. Speaker.

Only by allowing the market forces to work will the people of Manitoba be ensured that there is an adequate supply of good housing available over the long term. Rent controls are an inefficient and inequitable means of providing assistance to needy tenants. Assistance is not targeted under rental controls, Mr. Speaker, to needy groups. A program of shelter allowances pro viding rental subsidies to needy tenants, I suggest, is more efficient and equitable than either rent controls or public housing.

Such a program would help those who need it, and ensure that all truly needy families and individuals obtain housing at an affordable cost. At the same time it would encourage private invest ment in the housing sector because the market forces would be allowed to operate. Over the long term, Mr. Speaker, such a solution must be found because rent controls can only be a temporary measure, not a long-term measure. I hope, Mr.

Speaker, when the Minister concludes debate on second reading that he might indicate to this House what long-term measures he proposes to bring for ward in order to ensure an adequate supply of rental accommodation and construction in Manitoba. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to speak today on the second reading of The Residential Rent Regulation Act and to speak whole heartedly in favour of it.

During the election rent con trols was a major issue, not just in the City of Winnipeg but in other parts of the province as well and particu larly in Thompson. And I must say that the message of the people of Manitoba was pretty clear; they wanted rent controls reintroduced. If passed, this Act would do just that, it would reintroduce rent controls and that is the reason why I'm so strongly in favour of its passage. I fought personally against the removal of rent controls several years back, Mr. Speaker.

I felt at that time that it would open up the way for major increases in rent and I think the records show that did, indeed, happen. Once rent controls were removed there wasn't sufficient control on what landlords could ask in terms of rent increases and the increases went up rather dramatically. So I'm pleased person ally to see the reintroduction of controls, in fact, not just of rent controls, as such, but an improved version of rent controls. But I must say, Mr.

Speaker, that my own personal feelings in this particular case are shared by my con stituents, because in Thompson the message I heard time and time again throughout the election cam paign from tenants is that we need reintroduction of rent controls. Members of this House might find that rather surprising at first glance. Because of the popu lation decline we've had over the past few years our vacancy rate in Thompson is presently approximately 35 percent, Mr. Speaker. If one were to accept the arguments of the members of the Conservative Party one would expect there wouldn't be rent increases. No, Mr.

Speaker, there wouldn't even be stable rents, there would probably be reductions in rents but that hasn't happened, and it hasn't happened because of a number of reasons. First of all, while the vacancy rate is 35 percent, we actually have a large number of closed-up apartments and these apartments have been closed up, Mr. Speaker, not just by private landlords but by the CMHC which, of course, is run by the Government of Canada.

Because of the number of apartments that have been closed up there is a lack of competition in the City of Thompson and, in fact, that lack of compe tition has resulted in rents that are still higher than Winnipeg's. That's correct, Mr. Speaker, we have rents that are higher than Winnipeg's despite the fact that we have an official vacancy rate of 35 percent. And that isn't the only problem the tenants are facing, Mr. Speaker. In the past few years complaints about poor maintenance have increased rather dramatically. In 2750

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 fact, if you talk to any tenant in Thompson today - virtually every tenant, actually - you will find that one of the significant complaints about rental accommo dation in Thompson is that they are poorly maintained. Surprisingly, Mr. Speaker, another problem is that there is actually a shortage of some particular units - of housing, of townhouses and of apartments in Thompson. That's correct, Mr. Speaker, a shortage of some units. This, of course, is because of the close-up of a number of apartments.

Landlords, and I include in that category the CMHC, are reluctant to open up those units to maintenance them properly and they have set up rather long waiting lists which force peo ple either to accept inferior accommodation, or to go without accommodation for a considerable period of time in these units. So those are some of the problems we have in Thompson, Mr. Speaker, we have still rela tively high rents, we have poor maintenance and we have a shortage of some units. The other question then really is, what is happening in terms of the trend of rents in Thompson? Well, Mr.

Speaker, once again this may be a surprise to members of this House; it certainly will be a surprise to the members of the Conservative Party who are always talking about the competitive free market system. Despite the fact that we have a 35-percent vacancy rate our rents are continuing to go up and, in fact, if one compares the rent increase situation in Thomp son I think you'll find that our rent increases are actu ally even higher than in the City of Winnipeg where, I understand, the official vacancy rate is approximately 3 percent. That shows I think, Mr.

Speaker, some of the problems that exist with the unfettered free market system. It also shows why we need rent controls so badly. For the information of members of this House, I would like to read some of the increases that are being proposed in Thompson despite the 35-percent vacancy rate. These increases were in response to a survey I ran of all the identifiable tenants in Thompson approx imately two months ago and these are all increases that have been posed already for this year or have been posed for a later date this year. In the Goldeye Apartments, Mr.

Speaker, a 12 per cent increase; in the Coral Apartments, 12 percent; Davis Bay, between 12 and 14.5 percent; on Cree Road, 12 and 13 percent; on Centennial, 10 and 12 percent; on Nickle Road, between 12 and 16 percent; on Cambridge, the rent increase proposed for this year is 11.5 percent; Ottawa Place is 12. 5 percent; on 247 Princeton Drive, Mr. Speaker, 15. 1 percent; 424 Princeton, 12 percent. I could read more figures, Mr. Speaker, but the figures for other apartments and townhouses, other forms of rent accommodation in Thompson, are all pretty much in the same range. I would note, Mr.

Speaker, that under the regula tions that have been announced which would come along with The Residential Rent Regulation Act, the guideline figure for rent increases would be 9 percent. In other words, any increase 9 percent or more would be subject to automatic review under this Act. I note, Mr. Speaker, that not only a vast majority of the increases I've just listed are above that figure, practi cally all the increases are above that figure. So despite our 35 percent vacancy rate, Mr.

Speaker, virtually all rental accommodation in Thompson will be covered 2751 by The Rent Control Act that we're discussing today. Now I've given some of the reasons why personally, I support this Act, Mr. Speaker, but at this particular time I'd rather read to the members of this Assembly what some of my constituents feel about rent control. These comments, Mr. Speaker, are once again from the survey I ran a couple of months ago, a survey to which there was a very significant response, and I'd ask the members of this House to bear with me as I read some of these.

There's rather a large number of comments but it's not too often that the thoughts of the average guy on the street are brought into this Chamber and I think on this particular issue we might make an exception and start listening to the people for a change. For example, a pensioner and his wife on Princeton Drive wrote, and I quote, "I t sounds okay to us because we're old age pensioners and when you con sider about $70 a month just for medi cation, which also increases anywhere from 60 cents to $1.50 per month for each prescription, any little bit helps. Thank you." Another couple in Carlton Manor, Mr.

Speaker, told me and I quote, "We do believe that rent controls will be a good thing. We moved into these apartments in September, 1981, and already have an increase of $42 in this year. If this happens every six months we won't be able to stay here any longer. What is the answer? Pitch a tent? " A more general view of the situation facing Thomp son tenants, Mr. Speaker, from a tenant on Davis Bay who wrote, "I'm happy to see that you are trying to do something about the rent problem we have in Thomp son. Here are some examples of what we have to pay for the Davis Bay area. 1.

Rent after May 1 will be $300 per month; 2. Hydro per month is $80; 3. still gas per month during the winter months is on an average, $225; that's a total of $605 per month. So, do your best. " Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a typical situation that many people in Thompson face. The increases that this particular tenant mentioned, not just in rent, in hydro and in still gas. I continue, Mr. Speaker. Another tenant wrote to me, "The rent is too high compared to places in Southern Manitoba (Winnip eg)." Another tenant wrote and, Mr.

Speaker, I should mention at this particular time - I'll be more than happy to table some of the documents I'm reading from for the members of this House to read at their own particular time. I have no intention of reading all of them, but I felt perhaps a selection of them might give them some idea of what the people of Thompson feel on the rent control issue. Another comment, "I think rent control is a super idea. Some landlords increase the rent more than the amount of maintenance and repairs in apartment blocks." Another, Mr. Speaker, "I hope you hurry up and bring in controls. Thank you. " Another one, Mr.

Speaker, "M y thanks to you and your government for the interest shown in a situation of great meaning to the little man. " Another comment, Mr. Speaker, "I think it is good to have rent controls. It takes one week's wages to pay the rent, " and it continues with the particular circumstances facing that particular individual. Another person also indicated they're very happy with the idea of rent control. I think, Mr. ...

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 Speaker, this particular one perhaps sums it up and I quote, "Rent control is great. " Well, that's what the people of Thompson think about rent controls, Mr. Speaker. I think the members of the Conservative Party would do well to note those comments because, in this particular debate, I've heard some rather strange comments coming from their direction. First of all, they told us, Mr. Speaker, that they had a program of rent controls. That's what they told us. They said that their particular Act was, in effect, for rent controls.

But, almost in the same breath, they said rent controls are bad; they don't work. Well, that's somewhat contradictory, Mr. Speaker, but fortunately we don't really have to analyze that contradi ction because neither of those statements are true.

Their program was not a program of rent controls; their program was a program that was of knowledge to very few people and was used by even fewer, a program where you had to request an increase, where any arbitration that could take place might only apply to the particular apartment that you lived in rather than identical suites in the same block or the same area and it was the appearance of a rent control program but, in fact, it was not. It's the same thing with their statements about the problems with rent controls in general. I take it they're quoting from such sources as the Fraser Institute and, Mr.

Speaker, the arguments put forward by the Fraser Institute, which are often echoed by the Conservative members of this House, often they are very simplistic and are usually against a type of rent control that does not exist here in North America, but has been imposed in Europe. In that regard, Mr.

Speaker, I'm referring to the fact that the rent control programs that have been introduced here in North America, and the one that we have before us, are not blanket rent controls; they're not owner-oriented rent controls whereby only that person living in the suite is covered by that rent con trol program so long as they live there, because that kind of program leads to all sorts of anomalies, Mr. Speaker. You have someone who has been there 20 years paying one-half the rent of someone who has just moved in the day before. That's not the kind of pro gram we're talking about here today, Mr.

Speaker, and neither is it the kind of program that discourages new residential construction, as is the case with some rent control programs in Europe. In this regard, Mr. Speaker, I point out that this particular Act says that new construction will be exempt from rent controls for an initial rent-up period. I could continue, Mr. Speaker, but I think as I've said, it's quite clear that the arguments the members of the Opposition have against rent controls don't hold much water. I must say it's rather sad, Mr. Speaker, to hear this kind of contradictory arguing here in the Legislature.

I would personally much rather see members of the Conservative Party get up and say exactly what they really think about rent con trC'ls and, that is, that they'd rather have none at all. They'd rather have landlords be free to increase rents by whatever possible. I think that would be a state ment which would be a more honest reflection of the opinion of the Conservative Party. Mr. Speaker, the honourable members opposite are talking rather a lot about that now among themselves. Perhaps they're discussing whether this is indeed the approach they should take because I could tell them, Mr.

Speaker, in Thompson, that was the kind of approach that their people were putting forwar d; that is the kind of approach that they put forward as a party, door to door. We said we wanted rent controls. Many of the Conservative candidates said no. One of the reasons there are 34 members of the NOP here today is that we listened to what the people had to say - not the landlords but the people - and the people, as I indicated in these letters before, said they wanted rent controls. They said we want it soon; we need it soon. As I said earlier, Mr.

Speaker, I'll tell you about these documents if members opposite want. The people of Thompson were not unreasonable. Very few people said that there should be no rent increases. Many people said that there should be 10 percent, 9 percent; there were various figures. They said the key thing though is that they should be justifiable. They said that any rent increase should either be introduced for one of two reasons, Mr. Speaker; one, is an increased cost or, two, is to maintain present services. But they are saying today in Thompson, Mr.

Speaker, the tenants are saying today, that there have not been legitimate increases in costs which justify 10 , 12 and 15 percent increases and there has not even been the maintenance of present services which would justify even an inflation-plus increase. They are saying today that they are paying more for less and they need the protection that rent controls give. That is why, Mr. Speaker, apart from my own personal feelings on this situation, I'm listening to what the people of my constituency are saying; I am voting for rent controls. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Stur geon Creek. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: I move, seconded by the Hon ourable Member for Fort Garry that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, there's an agreement that there will be no Private Members' Hour today. It is the intention to move into Supply for Estimates and there is consent to adjourn the House at this time. Accordingly, on that understandi ng, I would move, seconded by the Minister for Economic Development that Mr.

Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty and that the House do now adjourn. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. 2752 MR. L. SHER MAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker; no disagreement with anything specified by the Gov ernment House Leader except that I think there was also another part of the agreement, which doesn't

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 affect the House admittedly, but members should know, I think there's an agreement that consideration in the Estim ates process will continue only until 5 o'clock. HON. R. PENNER: That is rig ht; that is the agreement. MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself in to a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honour able Member for Flin Flon in the Chair for the Depart ment of the Education; and the Honourable Member for The Pas in the Chair for the Department of the Attorney-General.

CONCURRENT COMM ITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - ATTORNEY-GENERAL MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN, P. Eyler: Commi ttee come to order. We are considering the Esti mates of the Attorney-General's Department. We're on Item 6. Legislative Counsel. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairm an, the Attorney General indic ated there was an increase of one-half staff man year in this department, I believe, if I got his figures correctly. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, that's ri ght. MR. G. MERCIER: Could you in dic ate the function? Is that a lawyer or a secretary? HON. R.

PENNER: This is term assistance for the proof reading of Statutes. My understanding is that the person is in place during the busy season, as it were, so that when Statutes come back from the prin ters they're proofread before being okayed at the prin ters for the runoff. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, shortly after we first came to office we had a meeting of the, I believe it was the Committee on Statutory Orders and Regulations, whose function is supposedly to review the regula tions passed by Cabinet and determine whether they are in compliance with the Statutes and have full legis lative authority.

The Committee agreed that since the work had not gone on for some period of time during the previous NOP government that Legislative Counsel would begin at some fixed period of time - I don't recollect the exact period of time when the work was to begin - but I believe that as a result of the lack of staffing and manpower under the Legislative Counsel none of that work was done.

We added one lawyer to the Legisla tive Counsel's office but now there's the additi onal burden of the French translations and, in addition, I believe one member of the department has not been well for some period of time and hopefully he will soon be back in good health full time. I'm stating this, Mr.

Chairm an, because I believe even though we added one person in this particular area that, with the additional burden of the French translation service and the overall burden on this office, in the way of drafting legislation and reviewing regulations and Orders- in-Council and being called upon, parti cularly Mr. Tallin, to resolve a lot of addi tional matters, that the Attorney-General may wish to consider adding staff to this particular area. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, the Member for St. Norbert is rig ht.

The Legislative Counsel, whom I believe is the best in Canada and I believe that view would be shared by the Member for St. Norbert, is overburdened, par ticu larly during the course of a Legislative Session, and I'm aware of this and aware that that problem has been attenuated by the illness of one of the senior members of that group.

Accordingly, I am looking on a rather urgent basis at the pos sibility - something I hope to realize perhaps with the next few weeks - of an additional person who mig ht, because of the variance in workload in that department through the course of a year, act at least half-time working with the Legislative Counsel and half-time on research with the department itself. MR. G. MERCIER: I have no further questions. MR. DEP UTY CHAIRMA N: Item 6. Legislative Counsel-pass; 6. (

a) Salaries -pass; 6.(b) -pass. Resolution No. 23 - Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $327,800 for Attorney-General, Legislative Counsel for the fiscal year ending the 31 day of March, 1983-pass. The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chai rman, are there any addi tions to the manpower of the RCMP in Manitoba in this fiscal year? 2753 MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, are you on Item 7? MR. G. MERCIER: I'm on Item 7, yes. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRM AN: No. 7. Law Enforcement. The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: On Law Enforcement, Mr.

Chair man, could the Attorney-General indi cate whether there are any additions to RCMP staffing? HON. R. PENNER: As the Member for St. Norbert will recall, under the terms of the Agreement there is sup posed to be about an 18-month lead time in the notice that they give of their requi rement for additional per sons and the time when those persons are put in place, so that I was not im mediately fully aware of what had been the development. There is an addition of seven staff, not all police, some support staff effective April 1 st and I've received the request.

I should mention this now, for 1983-84, I think it's 11, and I think about 8 will be in the 38 Program, Native Constables, three clerical and that's for April 1 st, 1983. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chai rman, I believe the Attorney-General indic ated in question period one

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 day that there was a 10 percent increase in the grants to municipalities? HON. R. PENNER: That's right, an additional 10 per cent for 1981-82 and in the Estimates there is 10 per cent for 1982-83. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, is Thompson pay ing at the high rate under the contract? There was a question whether they were over the 15,000 popula tion and we were waiting for the census figures. HON. R. PENNER: The census figures show them at 14,000-plus and change, and they're, therefore, at the lower rate. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, has the Minister given consideration to a grant program to municipali ties to try to assist municipalities, to an even greater degree, with perhaps the burden that smaller munici palities particularly will be faced with under the RCMP contract? HON. R. PENNER: I'm sorry, would you repeat that question? MR. G. MERCIER: Well, Mr. Chairman, I assume that the 10 percent increase in grants to municipalities was a continuation of the previous program and he, in fact, referred to it in '81-82 and then another 10 percent increase in '82-83.

Is the Attorney-General giving consideration to any increase in grants to municipali ties to deal with the effects of the new RCMP contract? HON. R. PENNER: No, nor have I received any spe cific requests from municipalities who are receiving RCMP services on the extension contracts. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, one aspect that arose from time to time was the question of establish ing or moving detachment offices from one location to another or in a new location. Are there any changes being proposed; any movement of detachment offices or new offices that will be established? HON. R.

PENNER: I've received one particular com plaint from the Town of Glenboro. It seemed to strike a familiar note there where -( Interjection )- MR. G. MERCIER: The member wanted to be here, yes. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, in fact the Member for Por tage spoke to me outside of the Committee Room a short time ago and had communicated with me ear lier. The Member for Gladstone. What did I say, Por tage? I'm sorry, the Member for Gladstone, yes.

When I received the particular concern which related to the fact - and it is a fact - that the periphery, the outer boundary rather, of the detachment is some thing like 24 or 25 miles from the town where the detachment is housed. I've discussed that with the RCMP at my last regular meeting with the RCMP offi cials and expect to discuss it with the RCMP officials again early in June. But aside from that, I've had no intimation of any general plan for redefining the boundaries and I'm not aware of any that exists. MR. G. MERCIE R: Mr.

Chairman, the member did indicate that she wanted to be at this Committee meet ing when this aspect was discussed but I believe she is in the other committee, so she will perhaps follow this up with the Attorney-General later on. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Attorney-General could indicate the status of the consideration of the McDonald Royal Commission Report HON. R. PENNER: There's nothing that has been tak ing place in my department that I have organized with respect to studying the McDonald Report I believe that members of my department have attended a conference recently.

There are ongoing meetings interprovincially between senior prosecu tors in the departments and I think - is it the Director of prosecutions - either the Director of the Prosecutions or the Senior Crown Attorney who is attending those meetings from my department and, in fact, there was such a meeting three or four weeks ago and they are discussing the problems raised by some of the recommendations, but there's been no report yet MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, as I recollect, Mr.

Montgomery was representing this province on that committee of officials from other provincial govern ments and the Federal Government and they were reviewing the McDonald Report with a view to, I sup pose if they could, arriving at some consensus on the implications of the report and I suppose some recommendations for action by provincial govern ments and the Federal Government, could the Attorney-General indicate when that review and report will be completed and when he expects it to be consi dered by himself and the other Provincial Attorneys General and the Minister of Justice? 2754 HON. R.

PENNER: First of all, let me correct a state ment I made a few moments ago. The person, in fact, who represents the Department of the Attorney General in these interprovincial meetings is still Jack Montgomery and Mr. Montgomery will report through the Deputies, and the Deputies to myself, and there's nothing to report yet. I don't anticipate a report any earlier than the fall. This matter will be one of a number of items on the agenda of the meeting of Attorneys-General from the various provinces taking place in P.E. L in October or November. -(I nter jecti on)- Yes, in the month of October. MR. G.

MERCIER: Has an agenda been formed for that meeting? HON. R. PENNER: It's too early. There is an exchange of opinion taking place at this time between officials, but it's very early on. Some matters have been referred from the previous meeting of Attorneys-General to that meeting and my recollection is that this is one of them. MR. G. MERCIER: The aside was, Mr. Chairman, we don't know who the Solicitor-General will be at that particular time.

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 HON. R. PENNER: Do we know who the Solicitor General will be? MR. G. MERCIER: Unfortunately. I have no more questions on this item. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Item 7. Law Enforcement pass. Resolution No. 24. Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $23,783,500 for Attorney-General, Law Enforcement for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1983-pass; No. 8. Public Trustee (

a) Salaries-pass; (

b) Other Expenditures. The Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr. Chairman, through you to the Attorney-General, I would like to ask if the Public Trustee has been caught up in any crossfire such as occurred several years ago when, I believe, as a trus tee of the affairs of a person whose family was getting assistance to attend University, and when the trustee was asked to provide the financial statement that is required for student aid there seemed to be some reluctance on the part of the Public Trustee to provide that information. HON. R. PENNER: I'm advised by the Public Trustee, Mr.

Raichura, who is with us that there would be no problem in the kind of case mentioned by the Member for Virden where a person, an infant beneficiary, infant in the sense of being under 18, is applying for a grant, an aid, a bursary, student loan and is required to have certain information disclosed as to income from an estate, that information would be forthcoming. MR. H. GRAHAM: No, this is not involving an infant. This is involving a young adult over 18 where the parents' financial statement must be filed under the Student Aid Program. HON. R.

PENNER: If you don't mind, just for clarifica tion, to the Member for Virden, in the example you're using, is the young adult attending University? MR. H. GRAHAM: Yes. HON. R. PENNER: I'm not sure under what circum stances the person being of age would have an estate administered on its behalf. MR. H. GRAHAM: I think the Public Trustee quite properly refused to divulge information because, in my opinion, the Department of Education was asking for information that was probably not within the realm of the Public Trustee to reveal.

But it is a problem that we could possibly run into again because I don't believe the rules have been changed substantially for student aid, where it is still a necessity for the parents' financial statement to be filed in order for that student to get a bursary from the province. HON. R.

PENNER: In the kind of case where the Pub lic Trustee is administering the estate of the parents who, for some reason, are unable to administer their own estate, let's say, mental infirmity due to age or whatever cause, and the person in receipt of some income from that estate is applying for student aid and the university requests information from the Public Trustee, the Public Trustee exercises a certain amount of discretion.

The basic rule is confidence, but in a case where there is a statutory requirement for the release Of some information to support an application of the kind indicated, the Public Trustee would dis close, but just so much information as would be necessary for the purposes of the particular application. MR. H. GRAHAM: I thank the Honourable Attorney General for that because in the case that I referred to, and it was quite some time ago, there were two young aspiring university students had to drop out of univer sity because that information was not available. HON. R.

PENNER: Yes, the Public Trustee recalls the case and the issue would be handled differently along the lines that I have indicated today. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 8.(b)-p ass. Resolution No. 25. Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1, 196,400 for Attorney-General, Public Trustee for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1983-pass. Item No. 9 Canada-Manitoba Legal Aid. 9. (

a) Salary. The Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, in his introductory remarks the Attorney-General indicated there might be an announcement very shortly with respect to a new cost-sharing agreement with the Federal Government. I wonder if the Attorney-General can give us any advance information? 2755 HON. R. PENNER: Our information is that such recommendations as there may be from the senior advisors in the Federal Department of Justice have gone to Cabinet through the Minister of Justice and are still at Cabinet level, and we're expecting some decision very shortly. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, the Attorney General indicated there was an addition of two staff man years. Could he indicate the functions of those two new positions? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, one is a staff lawyer and the other is a clerk. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, there was an announcement fairly recently that the new Legal Aid Board has done away with the user fee which was only collected in approximately 25 percent of the number of certificates that were issued. The news report indi cated that it would result in a loss of revenue of some $100,000. 00.

The Attorney-General might confirm whether those figures are correct and whether or not loss of revenue is taken into consideration in develop ing this Budget. HON. R. PENNER: The anticipated loss of revenue because of the abandonment of the user-fee concept for this fiscal year is $40, 000, I'm now advised. It will

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 likely be more in subsequent years. Now, I would just like to point out that there's an int eres ting figure which I think should be known, namely, that admi nis tration of Legal Aid - and the Executive Director is here, Mr. Freedman advised the Board that about 85 per cent of people who are accepted for legal aid but never showed up and there always is a no-show element. About 85 per cent of those who didn't show at the lawyer's office to which they'd been referred were those who had user-fee stipulat ions on their certificate.

I believe that's a signi f ica nt statistic demonstrating what was alleged by the Social Plan ning Council in their an alysis a few years ago, as they thought negative impact of the user-fee, namely, that it is a deterre nt to those who might oth erwise need legal services and be deterred by the user fee. As to the seco nd part of the question which I un der stood to be how the revenue loss will be made up in this and subsequent years.

I did in dicate in my open ing remarks an expectation of in creased reven ues, both from the cost-shari ng agreement - and that, of course, is still in Cabi netland - but more defin itely from in terest on lawyers' trust accou nts; the figures com ing in now on the in terest on lawyers' trust accou nts to be shared on some basis between Legal Aid and the Law Society, do in dicate a significant in crease in revenue. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chair man, just clarify that. The Attorney-Gen eral in dicated the in come from in terest and trust accounts is inc reasing this year? HON. R.

PENNER: Yes, in fact, the anticipatio n, and that's all it can be at the moment, is that

whereas the am ount received had been fairly steady - $1 million per an num for the last three, four years - we expect in the fiscal year which we are now int o that it will be about $1.5 millio n. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chair man, that's in teresting, I think, because it seems to me that those who were in volved for some years were concerned that the in terest from the trust accou nts was slowly dropping and would continue to drop, but I suppose because of the high-in terest rates that's the reason for the in crease in revenue from in terest from the trust accou nts. Mr.

Chairma n, were the inc ome guidelines raised for this coming fiscal year? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, they were, effective April 1. MR. G. MERCIER: Can the Attorney-General in dicate by how much? HON. R. PENNER: 11 percent. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chair man, in the Min ister's in troduction he referred to the incr ease in the hourly rat'.l allowed to members of the private bar from $25 to $35 per hour which was the first in crease since the int roduction of Legal Aid, I believe, in 1972.

Do these Estimates inc lude any further in crease in the hourly rate for members of the private bar in the coming fiscal year or in this fiscal year? HON. R. PENNER: No, they do not. MR. G. MERCIER: Has the Attorney-General had any discussio ns I believe it's the Legal Aid Liaison Com mittee of the bar and the Law Society - with respect to an an nual review of the hourly rate paid to lawyers? HON. R. PENNER: No, I have not. My inf ormation is, and this is inf ormation from Min utes of the Law Society, is that the Legal Aid Liaison Committee has up until recently, in any event, been relatively in active.

I would welcome a request from the committee for discussion of mutual concerns about legal aid but none has been forthcomi ng. I've had very productive meeti ngs with the Man itoba Bar. Some passing refer ence was made during the course of one such meeting to Legal Aid and I expected the Man itoba Bar to get back to me but the Legal Aid Liaison Committee of the Law Society has not. Yet, I' ve had two or three meet ings with representatives from the Law Society on a number of issues, but Legal Aid was not one of the issues raised in any of those meeti ngs. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairma n, I can only say to the Min ister that at the time we negot iated the in crease from $25 per hour to $35, the Legal Aid Liaison Com mittee was very active. They took, in fact, vigorous exception to the meagre in crease that they were allowed in raising the figure from $25 to $35 per hour.

We, I believe, un dertook to review that rate with them on an an nu al basis, which seemed more appropriate to me than simply reviewing it once every eight or nine years and then putti ng someo ne in the position of having to come up with a very substantial incr ease, because it was a substantial incr ease last year having to do all of that in one year. Obviously, it would be preferable to ren egotiate or rediscuss that on a much more regular basis, but if the committee hasn't pursued that with the Attorney-General then I don't criticize him.

It's up to them, I would think, to follow up that matter and pursue those discussio ns and seek out an annu al review of it with the Mini ster if that's what they'd like. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, I could never bring myself to believe that the former Attor ney-General gave what could possibly be described as a meagre incr ease. MR. G. MERCIER: That's the way they described it. HON. R. PENNER: Yes, I know, I'm rushing to your defence only, you'll und erstand, to build my own defences for future years. I think there should be periodic reviews, whether on an annu al basis or not I' m not prepared to say.

Cer tainly I would want , in any event, before discussing the possibility of a fee incr ease with representatives of the private bar and I would hope that might in clude, in any event, representatives from the Manit oba Bar Associatio n; I would hope that before we get to such a discussio n, we will have clarified what the level of federal input is going to be and stabilized our own notion of what the in terest inc ome is going to be, because we really need these in puts in order to look overall at the level of service in cludi ng the level of competency, in fact, that we are able if I may put it 2756

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 this way to purchas e, buy the level at which we pitch the fee to the private bar. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Ch airman, has the Attorney General taken a position that the Federal Government sho uld contribute to the cost of a Legal Aid Program involving divorces? HON. R. PENNER: Yes I have, quite strongly, and I would continue to support that position.

I think, in a way, the current developments in family law simply underline the need for the Federal Government to contribute substantially to the civil Legal Aid Program most of which, I think approximately 80 percent, sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less of the activity generated on the civil side in Legal Aid is in family law and a considerable portion of that is divorce; divorce, of course, is generated by legislation which is strictly within federal jurisdiction. This is, indeed, I think, a rationale for federal contribution to the civil side.

It's my understanding that one of the items, in fact, has been actively reviewed in the renegotiation is this concept It's my understanding that the Federal Gov ernment is not unsympathetic to that point of view, but whether or not it will be reflected in what emanates from the Cabinet in the riext four, six weeks, we'll simply have to wait and see. MR. G. MERCIER: Well, Mr. Ch airman, I don't dis agree with that position.

What I always did find amazing though, in the dis cussions pertaining to greater federal cost-sharing of civil Legal Aid Programs relating to divorce, was that many of the same people who advocated a transfer of jurisdiction of divorce from the federal to the provin cial jurisdiction were the same people who most vociferously asked for greater support from the Fed eral Government, including the Federal Government who were prepared to transfer that jurisdiction.

So if he agrees, and I think he does agree with the position we maintained in the Constitutional discussions that divorce legislation sho uld remain federal, I think the position that he's taken is justifiable. But if he should cha nge his position to those of a number of other provinces and the Federal Government that divorce jurisdiction sh ould be transferred, it's difficult to make a solid argument that Federal Government sho uld be making a financial contribution to Legal Aid in an area that would be totally within the provincial jurisdiction. HON. R.

PENNER: Simply for the record, I strongly support the position which was developed by the former Attorney-General with respect to divorce jurisdiction in terms of substantive law, and it's my understanding that the re's some perceptible shift on the part of some provinces towards the Manitoba position. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Ch airman, on another matter, there has been apparently a federal-provincial study in British Columbia dealing with the issue of public defender versus fee-for-service in legal aid systems.

The report I'm looking at indicates that the study comes out with ammunition for both sides of the issue, but arrives at one conclusion - that the public defender route would save B. C. about $6 million a year. I'm not advocating that particular position, but I wonder if the Attorney-General is considering any ch ange along that line or is considering that report HON. R. PENNER: I have received the full report within the last couple of mont hs; I've not had time to study it I have proposed, in fact, to take a look at it and discuss it with officials in Legal Aid over the next number of months.

This is not to say, I want to be careful here, that it is the present intention, my pres ent intention, the intention of the department, to insti tute a public defender system in any form the modi fied B. C. or actually Vancouver, I believe it was at Burnaby where the study took place - without a tho rough study of the report and of the criticisms of the report It might be the case, and again this is hypoth etical, that if we were to look at a public defender system we might do so only on an experimental basis to begin with.

I believe that it is arguable that local circumstan ces may affect the viability of such a system; it may be one thing in Burnaby or in Toronto, Montreal, and another thing in Winnipeg. But it's an option which we certainly are leaving open, have not at all foreclosed that option, but I'm not rushing into a public defender system without a very thorough study of the B. C. Report 2757 MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Cha irman, the Attorney General has just distributed in the House a bill that would amend The Legal Aid Act I don't know whether he's prepared to discuss that or the principles behind the amendments at this particular stage, but I wonder if he would care to comment on the rationale for tho se amendments. HON. R.

PENNER: I haven't got a copy of the bill with me, Bill 23, but really there is only one substantive cha nge, as I recollect it, the concept of introducing some amendments where it was built around that one substantial cha nge, and that had to do with some uncertainty felt by the Board of Legal Aid, the pre vious Board, as to whether or not the statute gave a statutory basis for granting certificates to groups who mi ght want to represent a low-income poverty law type interest or a consumer interest It had been the practice over the years to issue such certificates, not in large numbers, but on a selected basis.

But as I understand it, the previous Cha irman and the Board I'm not sure formally or not - expressed some doubt as to whether or not that could be done. Being aware of that doubt, even tho ugh the practice had been to issue such certificates, the amendment is designed to give the Board the auth ority to do so in its discretion under certain defined circumstances. So tha t's what the principal point of the amendments is. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Cha irman, what criteria sh ould govern the Board's discretion in that case? HON. R. PENNER: Do you have a copy of the bill with you?

The bill attempts to give the Board fairly wide discretion and sets out two areas where such certifi cates mi ght be granted having to do with consumer interests and I'm not sure if the term poverty law,

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 environmental law, consumer interests are both mentioned. The criteria that I would expect the Board to use would be. first of all, to take a look at the group repres ented, whether or not it is genuinely in the main a low-income group. The Board should not require that every member of the group be individually eligible for Legal Aid. By doing that, you might easily foreclose the group from gaining a certificate if one member. two members. would individually not qualify.

But sub stantially, the group should be a low-income group in which. in the Board's opinion. it is in the public inter est to grant a certificate for that group to be repre sented in advocating a position on such things as utility rates or things of that kind before an administra tive tribunal or commission or in court. if the need arises. MR . G. MERC IER: Mr. Chairman. the Attorney General has referred to a wide discretion by the Board. and that would appear to be the case from my brief reading of the Bill that was distributed. The Board will be. I think. from time to time placed in a difficult situation.

It's one thing for Legal Aid to issue a certificate to someone who comes in with a criminal charge. or someone who comes in with obvious rights to pursue a separation or divorce. or is faced with an application under The Family Maintenance Act. or a petition for divorce. or faced with a criminal charge. There is a specific issue to deal with. In the type of certificate that the Attorney-General is referring to now; it can be much broader issues. obviously, involved in the application for a certificate to the Board.

I ask this question: Is there a danger that the Board may, in some instances. not issue a certificate to a group if they disagree with the objectives of that group? To cite an example: The Board, I believe. issued a certificate to Sister MacNamara's group in opposing the Sherbrook-McGregor Overpass. There was another group on the other side of the tracks who were in favour of the construction of the Sherbrook McGregor Overpass and who felt just as strongly. I suppose, as the Sister MacNamara's group.

Now, I'm not sure whether that group. in fact, applied for a Legal Aid certificate to represent them - and I'm not, at this stage, arguing for or against the Sherbrook McGregor Overpass. I'm trying to use it as an example but there might very well in that instance arise a situation where the majority of the Board supported, say, Sister MacNamara's group, and as a result refused to issue a Legal Aid certificate to the other group in favour of the construction.

I don't know how much money was spent under that certificate by Legal Aid; perhaps the Attorney-General might have those fig ures available through his staff. It would be interesting to know what amount that was because it would be an example of showing how, if an arbitrary decision was made against the group in support of the Sherbrook McGregor Overpass. how the public purse could be used to a significant degree to the advantage of one group that the Board wanted to support. HON. R. PENNER: There is potentially that kind of a problem; I wouldn't see it as a danger.

The sections of the Act which deal with eligibility or the proposed amendments which deal with eligibility, set out crite- ria as to the kind of issue in 3.1 (2) and set out criteria in terms of financial eligibility on the third page at 10.1 (2). I think that the Board would have to exercise judgment within the parameters of the statute. In the case mentioned as an example, the group, that is the group headed by Sister MacNamara. the Rossbrook group, I guess. the services of a staff lawyer were used.

Now that doesn't mean there wasn't a cost to the public purse; there was the time of that staff lawyer involved in preparation and involved in appearances before the hearing. The costs were not vast; they represented some days of the time of one staff lawyer. The Board made a judgment call as the Board does when it deals with individuals - I'll come back to that in a moment but the Board in the case referred to on the Sherbrook-McGregor Overpass made a judgment call that the group which applied for and was granted representation much more genuinely involved a pov erty law group than did the other group.

Now whether the Board was right in that judgment is something I'm not able to say. Let me continue with the point I made parentheti cally a moment ago - the Board is often in this posi tion, that is. an area director receiving an application for Legal Aid may turn down that application and many of these applications are turned down every week, every month. Persons who have been refused an application may appeal and often do appeal; it comes before the Board; I read the minutes of the Board and, of course, I was a member of the Board for many years and am familiar with the process.

The Board must exercise its judgment, sitting as an appel late body, as to whether or not the decision of the area director should be overturned. In many instances, the decision of the area director is overturned. 2758 What this indicates to me. and indicated to me in practice and not just theoretically, is that in many of these areas it's not black or white, that it is difficult to decide whether an individual falls within or without the eligibility guidelines and on borderline cases the benefit of the doubt might be given in favour of grant ing a certificate.

So too with a group, which will now. because there were not guidelines before, now there are statutory guidelines. so that there are some parameters within which the Board must exercise its discretion. The Board will have to make a decision based on established guidelines and there is much less chance of arbitrariness than if we simply followed what had been the practice before, of just leaving it in an undefined way to the complete discretion of the Board. MR. MERCIER: Well. Mr.

Chairman, the previous guidelines may have been very uncertain, but I think the Attorney-General would have to agree that this particular statute is also very broad. As I've indicated, it's clear that if an individual applies for a Legal Aid certificate he's within the guidelines; he's charged with an indictable offence; he virtually has a right to Legal Aid certificate.

Under this legislation, 3.1 (2) indicates the society may furnish legal aid to a group, under subsection ( 1 ): "I n any matter. that in the opin ion of the society. involves an objective or interest common to the members of the group and relating to an issue of public concern. including without restrict-

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 ing the generality of the foregoing, any consumer or environmental issue. " So, if there was broad discre tion before, there still is under this

section a very broad discretion by the Board as to whether or not a certificate will be issued, and the

Section 10.(1 )( 2) is helpful to a certain extent but certainly is not that limiting. There is a danger, if the Board decides that they do not share the objective or interest of the group, that they will not issue a certificate to one group while they may issue a certificate to another group involved in the other side of the question at issue. There was something else. Well, 10 .( 1)( 2) refers to the absolute discretion of the society to determine, etc., whether the question of incomes and sufficient funds to pay legal costs.

I'm wondering whether or not there could be some more specific criteria included in this legislation because the Attorney-General is really asking the Legislature to allow the Board to proceed in their absolute discretion, to quote the wording of the Act. HON. R. PENNER: Right.

First of all. the Act now and the regulations as it concerns the granting of legal aid to individuals, contains - and here I'm looking at the regulations language as follows: 18 .( 2) of the Regulations: "Subject to the discretion of the Area Director," not even the Board, one person, "a certifi cate may be issued to a person otherwise entitled thereto," and then it sets out criteria. So one would expect, whenever discretion is given either to a judi cial body or a quasi-judicial body, that it must exercise its discretion within the context of the criteria set forth.

Then there's an appeal to the Executive Director in 18.( 5) of the regulation, "Where, in the opinion of the Executive Director," which is again discretionary, and there is language of that kind throughout the regulations. Now, if I may go back to the example that was used to illustrate what the member believed may be a danger, there was an instance in which there were no criteria, at least no statutory of criteria, and the pre vious Board, not this Board, turned down one group and granted to another.

My argument is this, that it's much easier for a Board so minded in a sense, influ enced by external criteria, political bias, to operate in that way if there are no statutory criteria at all. So what we're really coming down to is, I believe the argument can be made and I think it would be accepted by the member, that if we are to issue certificates to groups, and I'm assuming that there's an agreement on that premise, then there should be statutory criteria to limit the discretion.

You can't eliminate discretion in such areas; life is too complex, but to limit it, now what should the criteria be which limit the discretion of the Board? I'm perfectly open to suggestions that may be made in the House and in Committee as this bill is debated to any suggestion that might be made for sharpening the expression of the criteria. I want to indicate right now that I'm open to such suggestions.

I'll just use this as an example, the member emphasized by tone the word, "absolute," in 10.1 (2) "absolute discretion." Quite frankly, looking at it now, the word in my view, is unnecessary and can well go out. It might be inter- preted as giving a Board too wide a discretion. Discre tion, I think, is discretion and the word "absolute" plays no useful role; it should go out, and that discre tion would then be limited by (

a) and (

b) and maybe in the course of debate, as I said, either in the House or in Committee, that we can find some way of sharpening the language. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, what would the Attorney-General's view be then, using that example of the Sherbrook-McGregor Overpass? Does he believe that with this legislation a certificate would be granted to the group in favour of the construction, as well as the group opposing the construction? HON. R. PENNER: I don't see why not if both meet the criteria.

Now, Nova Scotia operates a complete staff lawyer system, or did - I don't know if it's changed - it's still a complete staff-lawyer system, and it took the view which I found strange, that if it appointed one of its staff-lawyer to represent, let's say, the husband in a matrimonial dispute, it would not grant a certificate to a staff-lawyer to represent the wife, assuming some kind of conflict of interest which I never really thought was there. My own position would be, were I a member of the Board and if groups on both sides came forward and met the criteria, that both should get a certificate.

It might be, in that case, that the certificate would go to a staff-lawyer, or if a certificate went to a staff-lawyer, then the other certificate would go to a member of the private bar to lessen any chance of internal conflict of interest. That might be the way to resolve that problem.

But basically the position I take, and I expressed that in some public utterances of mine since assuming office, that if rights in society are to mean anything, then there must be the right of advocacy to go with it and where, for reasons of low income, an individual or a group cannot properly advocate its interest to give expression to rights which it has, either common law or by statute, then in fact it doesn't have that right. MR. G. MERC IER: Mr.

Chairman, I appreciate the Attorney-General answering these questions now and I promised him I won't raise these matters again and duplicate the time spent. 2759 In looking at

Section 10.1 (2) , in the references there to the ability of the group to pay legal costs, is the reference there to the income guidelines established by Legal Aid? I want to just use this example again in order to fully explain the question. Let's assume that the group opposing the construction of the Sherbrook-McGregor Overpass all fell within the income guidelines established by Legal Aid.

But let's suppose the group in favour of the construction on the other side of the bridge were not wealthy, but let's call them the working poor, the middle class, their incomes are above the guidelines, but their incomes .are all going to fixed costs for their mortgage, their food, etc., and I hope the Attorney-General realizes what I'm trying to get at.

If the income guidelines are used and the group proposing the construction get a certif icate, but the group on the other side are not granted a certificate but they're above the guidelines, but really, while they're over those guidelines - and I call them the middle class or the working poor - and their

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 monies are all going to a fixed budget, if they don't get a certificate at the same time, there will also be a hardship imposed upon them if - let's say as in the Sherbrook-McGregor Overpass - they were to get involved in representations before Committees of Council, before Council, before the Federal Courts, before Committees of the Legislature or whatever, I wonder if the Attorney-General could indicate or could answer that concern that I have. HON. R. PENNER: I think I can answer it in two ways. One is,

Section 3.1 (3) of the proposed amendments says that "the society may furnish Legal Aid to a group under subsection (1) without charge or with a parcel charge, " so that where you are dealing with group (

b) which compared to group (

a) is somewhat higher in the income scale, the Board might still determine that it is eligible for a certificate with some contribution towards the cost.

The second approach that I would take, although more difficult to operate with a group admittedly than with an individual we used to take this approach in listening to appeals that came before the Board when I was a member - that if in fact the anticipated cost - and it could only be a guess - of the Legal Aid paid by the group would in effect require such contributions from the members that it would adversely affect their income levels judged against the criteria, that would be an instance for granting the certificate. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Chairman, my last comment on this subject is to just indicate to the Attorney General that he can expect, I believe, the former Member for lnkster to appear at Law Amendments Committee opposing this Bill. HON. R. PENNER: Let joy be unconfined. MR. CHAIRM AN: 9. (a) - the Member for Virden. MR. H. GRAHAM: Mr.

Chairman, when we're dealing with the general field of Legal Aid and its application and use throughout the province, I would like to ask the Attorney-General if there is any statistical infor mation available regarding the percentage of cases heard in the various jurisdictions in which Legal Aid was used or in other words, I want to know if there was certain areas of the province where it was used to far greater extent than in other areas? HON. R. PENNER: I will provide that information tomorrow.

I regret I don't have the last Annual Report with me, but the last Annual Report gives a breakdown by court and by judicial district.

The information which is available in the Annual Report shows the number of Legal Aid cases by court, but does not show what percentage of the total cases in that court were Legal Aid, but there's a rule of thumb which may be safely used when looking at criminal statistics and that is that the number of Legal Aid certificates granted will represent something well in excess of 80 percent of all criminal cases heard in a given court will be represented where there's representation, that representation will be through a Legal Aid certificate. MR. H.

GRAHAM: A second general question and it deals again with a rough percentage in the Appeal Court. Is there any significant drop in the Appeal Court in the use of Legal Aid there or does it rise? HON. R. PENNER: You mean in terms of the percen tage of cases heard in the MR. H. GRAHAM: Yes. HON. R. PENNER: No, it drops. That is, the percen tage of cases heard in the Appeal Court, the number represented by Legal Aid certificates is a small per centage of the total heard in the appellate courts. MR. H.

GRAHAM: I think it would be interesting to have those percentage figures where Legal Aid is - the percentage of the cases in the lower courts and the percentage in the Appeal Court. HON. R. PENNER: I'll attempt to get them, Mr. Gra ham, but I can't really undertake that I will. It's difficult to break out those statistics because they're not reported quite in that way.

What we would have to do is - let's say, take the Manitoba Court of Appeal - get the figure of criminal appeals, probably to use that as a criteria, heard and see if we can relate that in any given year to the number of certificates given for an appeal in the Court of Appeal. We'll try to get those figures on that basis. Would that be sufficient if I broke out the figures in that way? MR. H. GRAHAM: That's quite fine. There's a reason that I have in my own mind. I have wrestled with the question of Legal Aid for quite some years. 2760 HON. R. PENNER: Yes, I recall your interest. MR. H.

GRAHAM: And I have always felt that the state probably, if in its collective wisdom, it decides to pro vide legal assistance to underprivileged members of society in getting their case heard before the courts, I accept that. But having once had a decision of the court, whether or not the state has the same obligation to carry that further in an appeal against that decision is, I think, a separate question and one that I think that we in society have not really dealt with properly.

If we had unlimited money, there would be no problem, but we do have all of us face a problem of increasingly difficult times to adequately finance the programs that we do put in place and our funds are not unlimited. Where do you draw the line at the point where you say, I'm sorry, we can no longer assist you, our funds are limited and this is as far as we can go or we can go this much further. Where do you draw that line? At the point where you can say, I'm sorry, we have done all that we can in this field, or is it unlimited?

Is finance purely the only criteria in awarding legal benefit where you can go as far as the highest court of the land? HON. R. PENNER: I believe I may satisfy the concern raised by the Member for Virden by telling him I've just confirmed that is still the practice. Before a certificate is granted for an appeal, the person issuing the certificate and the Board must be satisfied that there is a reasonable chance for sue-

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 cess. That is, the appeal is based on substantial grounds; exclude out of hand anything that's frivolous or vexatious and indeed, if any error at all is made in judgment, it's made against the granting of a certifi cate on appeal.

Whereas, it's the other way with the granting of a certificate prior to appeal, that is in the trial court, so that the issuer of the certificate must be satisfied that there is a reasonable chance for success on appeal. MR. H. GRAHAM: I have two questions yet. Perhaps the Attorney-General could give us some information where an appeal is launched. In what percentage of cases is the same lawyer involved in the appeal hear ings of the individual? HON. R. PENNER: It's almost always the same lawyer. MR. H. GRAHAM: Well, that probably causes me some more concern. That's it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Norbert.

MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Attorney-General can give any estimates of the addi tional cost to Legal Aid as a result of the right to counsel provisions of The Young Offenders Act in the Charter of Rights? I appreciate it would have to be a ballpark figure but there must be a figure that's been developed particularly with the negotiations with the Federal Government on The Young Offenders Act and whether or not there will be any federal cost sharing. HON. R.

PENNER: One can only estimate at this stage, but looking at the dark side of things and maybe that's the safest thing to do - it may be the · additional cost of representing young persons in con flict with the law under The Young Offenders Act to the Legal Aid system because of the requirement for representation in The Young Offenders Act may be anywhere between $750,000 and $1 million a year. In addition, there will be a cost impact on our Crown Attorneys. We will undoubtedly have to have more Crown Attorneys employed in that particular court system than is presently the case.

Now as I mentioned in my opening statement. there is an undertaking in general from the Federal Gov ernment through the Solicitor General to meet the costs occasioned by the enactment of The Young Offenders Act. It is our view that their responsibility should be to meet all of the costs. Let us hope that in fact they accept that responsibility MR. G. MERCIER: Just related to that.

In the plans for the development of the new Law Courts facility, is the Attorney-General committed to the plan to the extent of transfering the Juvenile Family Courts to the Courthouse on Broadway when construction of the new facility is completed and Provincial Judges' Court moves into the new facility? HON. R. PENNER: Yes. MR. CHAIRM AN: 9.(a)-pass; 9.(b)-pass. Resolution No. 26 - Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $5, 828,500 for Attorney-General, Canada-Manitoba Legal Aid, for the fiscal year ending the 31st Day of March 1983-pass. No. 10.

Personal Property Security Registry, 10. (

a) Salaries - the Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to look at the sheet that the Attorney-General kindly supplied me with respect to revenue. The estimated revenue this year is $1,200,000 against operating expenses of $890,000. 00. HON. R. PENNER: Right. MR. G. MERCIER: Would that you could only operate all your departments? HON. R. PENNER: Yes, it's a tribute to Mr. Sinnott, among others. MR. CHAIRMAN: 10.(a)-pass; 10.(b)-pass.

Resolution No. 27 - Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $890,700 for Attorney-General, Personal Property Security Regis try, for the fiscal year ending the 31st Day of March 1983-pass. HON. R. PENNER: Committee rise. We'll do that tomorrow. MR. CHAIRMAN: Committee rise. SUPPLY - EDUCATION MR. CHAIRMAN, J. Storie: The Committee will come to order. I believe we're beginning with Item No. 6. Universities Grants Commission, Resolution 54. Item No. 6. (

a) Salaries. 2761 The Member for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to ask the Minister to describe for the committee, if she would, the situation with respect to the whole program of physical education as it affects the Uni versity of Manitoba and the University of Winnipeg.

As she is well aware, there has been some considerable interest expressed in recent years by various person nel at the University of Winnipeg in getting into a full scale physical education program which would pre sumably produce Bachelors of Phys Ed for the school system, college system, community club system and the community generally.

Recently an announcement with respect to a multi million dollar grant for the University of Winnipeg was made, pegged to the ultimate construction and estab lishment of a field house for the University of Win nipeg which has also been legitimately part and parcel of that institution's ambitions. But, Mr.

Chairman, speaking as one who represents an area of the prov ince in which the University of Manitoba is located and having some considerable familiarity with the School of Phys Ed at the University of Manitoba and also appealing to the Minister and the department to look at the subject from the perspective of cost effi ciency, value for dollars spent and the whole undesir ability of duplication and redundancy, I would ask her

Wednesday, 26 May, 1982 where the department and the Universities Grants Commission stand vis-a-vis the professional disci pline of physical education training and physical edu cation schools in our post-secondary institutions in Manitoba? The University of Manitoba has over the years de veloped a fine facility for the training of Phys Ed pro fessionals. It has established a considerable reputa tion in that field. The leaders of the school, persons like Dr.

Henry Janzen, Professor Jim Daley, to name just two and there are many others, have brought considerable commitment, insight and talent to the development of that School of Physical Education at the University of Manitoba as a major institution of professional training not only for this province, but for Western Canada. They tell me, Mr. Chairman, that they could gradu ate 375 Phys Ed professionals a year if that many were needed. The fact of the matter

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-62
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 62.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d5441e324e2d399ca534a430d6ac05667ff13ee5

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