Manitoba Hansard — 29 June 1982 (Sitting 86A, 32nd Legislature, 1st Session)

32-1-86a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 Time - 10:00 a.m. OPENIN G PRAYER by Mr. Sp eaker. MR . SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presen ting Peti tions ... Read ing and Recei ving Petitions ... PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Ri ver East. MR . P. EYLER: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present the Fifth Repor t of the Stan ding Comm ittee on Law Amendme nts. MR. ACTING CLERK, G. Mackintosh: Your Comm it tee met on Monday, Jun e 28, 1982 and heard repre senta tions with respect to the bill as follows: Bi ll (No. 23) -

An Act to amend The Legal Aid Ser vices Soci ety of Man itoba Act. Mr. Sid ney Green - Progressive Party Bill (No. 27) -

An Act to amend The Summ ary Con victions Act. Mr. Nor man Rosenb aum - Man itob a Assoc iation for Ri gh ts and Li berties Bi ll (No. 51 ) -

An Act to amend The Chi ld Welfare Act. Ms. Sybil Shack - Man itoba Associat ion for Righ ts and Liberties Your Comm ittee has consi dered: Bi ll (No . 53) -

An Act to amend The Bu ilders' Liens Act. Loi modi fiant la

Loi sur le privilege du constructeur. Bill (No. 31) -T he Chi ld Custody Enforcement Act.

Loi sur !'execution des ordonnan ces de garde. Bi ll (N o. 51 ) -

An Act to amend The Chi ld Welfare · Act. Bill (No. 23) -

An Act to amend The Legal Aid Ser vices Soci ety of Man itoba Act. Bill (No. 27) -

An Act to amend The Summ ary Con victions Act. And has ag reed to report the same with certa in amendm ents. Your Comm ittee has also consi dered: Bi ll (No . 43) -

An Act to amend The Pub lic Schools Act. Loi modifiant la

Loi sur les ecoles publiques. Bi ll (No. 60) - The Statute Law Amend ment Act (1982). Bill (No . 52) -

An Act to amend The Liquor Cont rol Act. And has ag reed to repor t the same without amendm ent. All of whi ch is respectfully subm itted. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mem ber for Ri ver East. MR. P. EYLE R: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honour able Member for the Pas, that the Report of Comm ittee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR . SPEA KER: The Honour ab le Me mber for Spring field. MR . A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the Fi rst Repor t of the Standing Comm ittee on Muni cip al Affai rs. MR. ACTING CLE RK: Your Comm ittee met on Mon day, June 28th, 1982 and appoi nted Mr.

Anstett as Chairman. The Comm ittee heard representat ions with respect to the follo wing bill: Bill (No. 33) -A n Act to amend

An Act respect ing the Assessment of Property for Taxa tion in Muni cip alities in 1981 and 1982, Mr. Michae l J. Mercur y - Aiki ns, MacAulay & Th or- val dson clients Mr. David Pearlman - Private Citizen Mr. Harry Peters - Manit oba Bar Associat ion Mr. R.O. (Bob) Douglas - Man itoba Farm Bu reau Mr. Mu rry Sigm ar - Winnip eg Real Estate Board Your Comm ittee has considered: Bi ll (No. 63) -

An Act to amend The Credit Uni ons and Caisses Populai res Act. And has agr eed to report the same with certa in amendme nts. Your Comm ittee has also considered: Bill (No. 32) -

An Act to amend The Mun icip al Act, Bill (No. 33) -A n Act to amend

An Act respect ing the Assessment of Property for Taxat ion in Mu nicip alities in 1981 and 1982. Bill (No. 50) -

An Act to amend The Crown La nds Act and the Muni cip al Assessment Act. And has ag reed to repor t the sa me wi thout amend ment. All of which is respectfully subm itted. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour ab le Memb er for Spring field. MR. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honour able Memb er for Da uphin, that the Repor t of the Comm ittee be received. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion of Bills ... ORAL QUESTIONS . Introduction MR. SPEAKER: The Honour ab le Memb er for 3640

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 Tur tle Moun tai n. MR . B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Fir st Min ister. Last evening, Mr. MacEachen stated in his Bu dget that he would be cal ling upon the Provin cial Governments to join with the Federal Government in placing restraints upon pub lic sector wages and upon costs that are di rectly with in the cont rol of the Provi ncial Governments. Could the Fir st Min ister advise the House of what his response will be to that request? MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Fi rst Mi nister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, Man itoba can only support a restraint program that in deed will support restraint for those of high er in comes within the public service, those earn ing $35,000 and more. Indeed, that is what we have done by way of recent announ ce ments, we've im posed an 8 percent limi t in sofar as all in cr eases of public sala ried employees of approxi mately $35,000 and more. Insofar as Min isters of the Crown, the in c rease is 6 percent. The Memb ers of the Legis lat ure, as we all know, our in cr eases are res tricted to the CPI of the average indus tri al wage.

Com pare that with what has taken place over the last two years, Mr. Speaker. There is qui te a clear and distin ct difference between the cons istent approach at the provi ncial level, as opposed to the in consis tent ap proach that's been pursued federally. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, does the Fi rst Min ister believe then that Mr. MacEa chen's call for restrain t in the public sector com pensation is an in equ itable call, gi ven the situation where we have so much un em ployment and so many people accept ing stable pay or even cuts in pay?

We have, for example, over 5,000 of a workforce of something like 5,600 mi ners in Northern Manit oba un employed at this ti me. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, the fact remains, and the im portant fact is that the present deep reces sion that Canada is suf feri ng from relates to a tight money, high in ter est rate policy that has been pursued by the Federal Gov ernme nt, tracking policies that have been pursued for the last yea r-and-a-half, two years in Uni ted States of Ame rica.

To deal on a cosmetic fashion without dealing with the real roots of the tight money, high in terest rate policy, is not going to resolve the basic problems of this cou ntry. Mr. Speaker, what I am concerned about is ind eed by us attempting to do so, as the Fin ance Minis ter did last nigh t, he will raise a false expe ctat ion that will be dashed when the situation has not impr oved, late fall or early sum mer , which may very well be the case un less th ere are some more fu ndam ental and basic policies that are developed to cont end with tigh t money, high in ter est rate policies overall.

Unf ortu nately, this Budge t did not come to gr ips with that situa tion. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, is the Fir st Min ister going to Ottawa with a closed mind on this su bject, or is he going to go to Ottawa wil ling to listen to the request that the Federal Gov ernm ent is making and to listen to the argum ents that the other Provinc ial Governments may be putting forward? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, let me assure the honour able memb er that we are always prepared to do that which is fair. We're always prepared to deal with an open mind, and I would hope, Mr.

Speaker, that tom orrow we could dimini sh the extent of provinc ial-feder al bickeri ng, as we attempt to seek out solutions. Insofar as Man itoba is concerned, our policy as per the MGE A settlement that was jus t concluded, does in deed propose an area of restrain t. As I mentioned, those earning $35,000 and over are restricted to an 8 percent in c rease. Tho se at the lower levels of in come , the clerks, the jani tors, the orderlies, Mr. Speaker, receive approxi mately 14 percent. Mr. Speaker, we are not going to imp ose the bur den of in flat ion upon the poorest in our community.

We, as a government, will not do that. MA. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, there are those in society who would argue that the public sector are not among the poorest people that we have in our pro vi nce. Mr. Speaker, those who are un able to find job s and those who have been laid off might consider thems elves to be in a less advantageo us position. Mr. Speaker, what will the gover nm ent's position be with respect to costs that lie within the cont rol of the government, such as telephone system rates and rates charged in personal care home s? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, we'll be lo oking at all rates, because it is our desir e ind eed to restrain the in crease by way of any rates. It's for that reason that the Min ister of Education , earlier this year, im posed a tu ition rate in crease which was condemned by mem bers across the way. It was for that reason in deed that the Min ister of Ur ban Affairs im posed a transit fee rate freeze that was objected to by memb ers across the way. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to also poin t out ... 3641 MR. SPEAK ER: Order please, order please. The Honour able Fir st Min ister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I also would like to poin t out to the honour able mem bers that when we do ind eed com pare settle ments rega rding the private sector and the public sector in Man itoba we do fi nd many many ins tances of higher private sector settle ments than inde ed has been the case with the public sector.

When the honour able memb er makes refer ence to public servants not being badly done by, Mr Speaker, that is why I emph asize, and I em phasize again, we limi ted the in c rease to those earn ing $35,000 and over within the public sector to 8 percent, but we are not going to im pose a 6 percent in crease on the jan itor ea rning $1 1,0 00 or $12,000 in the Department of Gove rn ment Service s: we are not going to im pose a 6 or a 5 percent in crease only on the cook working in the hosp itals in the Department of the Min ister of Health. It is that very kind of in consis tency, Mr.

Speaker, and in equity that gen erates .. MR . SPEAKER: Order please.

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, it is my desire to comp lete my remarks wi thout having to shout over singing from across the way and I would hope that you would ensur e that such si ng ing wou ld not take place in the Cham ber. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Hon our able First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, as wel l, I should point out to honourable mem bers across the way that in the past five years, 1977 up un til the present ti me, change s by way of MGE A settlements have been 4.9, jus t about 5 percent, less than the rate of infl ation during tho se five years, so how can it be claim ed that public sector wage in creases in the Province of Mani toba have contributed to inflation? MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, can the First Minister advise the House of any specific proposals which he wi ll be placing before his colleagues when they meet tomorrow in Ottawa? HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker , ther e wi ll be a numb er of proposals we wi ll be putting before the First Ministers, includ ing the Prime Minister tomor row. Th ere wi ll be proposals that wi ll deal not with cosmetic measures, but wi ll deal with measures to call for a turnar ound in regard to the ti gh t money, hig h inte rest rate policy. Mr. Speaker , I know that honour able mem bers across the way do not like to hear this constant refer ence because, un fortuna tely, the Cons ervative Party has been bankrupt of ideas pertaining to the basic causes and illne sses within our total economic struc tu re. Mr.

Speaker, we propose to make subm issions, to make a clear call. Mr. Speaker , I again have to ask you if you are MR. SPEAKER: Or der please. The Honour able First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, yes, we wi ll be mak ing proposals, but our proposals wi ll attack the very root of the eco no mic problems tha t we're confronted with in Canada today and elsewhere. Mr. Speaker, to do other wise would be only trickery and gimmickr y which this govern men t is not going to participate in. MR . B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, my que stion is the Minister of Finance.

In view of the adj ustment s, rather drama tic adjustme nts, tha t the Federal Govern ment has made in its projection of deficit and borrowing requirements and redu ced revenues, can the Mini ster of Fi nance advise the Hous e at this ti me wha t im pact those adj us tments are likely to have upon the deficit position of the Man itoba Govern ment? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: The Memb er for Stu rgeon Creek wants to hear about Aus tralia; I' d be qu ite happ y to talk about Australia.

The Memb er for Tur tle Mou ntain asked a serious que stion and I wou ld hope, rather than hav ing that sort of mumb ling from across the way, we could deal with tha t kind of issue. Th ere are a numb er of ite ms that we have noticed with respect to revenues from last night. First of all , there is nothing indicated in the Bu dget papers that we have been able to find indicating a specific figure as to reductions of revenues for the Province of Mani toba.

However, there are a numb er of areas where, with the federal envelope system, it appears that there are some dollars being shifted out of some of those envelopes in order to pay for some of the program ming annou nced. One of tho se envelopes happens to be the Native Econom ic Dev elopment Program and it is being deferred. Th ere is a decrease in federal expen ditures in the amount of $45 million for the year 1982-83. We don't know yet how tha t wi ll im pact on the Province of Man itoba. Ther e is -(I nterjection)- yes, the North ern Dev elopment Agreement.

We could be having some problems and that, obvio usly, is of real concern, because you really then get into the qu estion of how serious are we when we have .32 percent reduction in federal expenditures, as a resul t of this cosme tic so called freeze that they have, .32 percent reduction in their total expenses. Yet, whom do they pick on to get this other program ming of the irs going? Our Native Econom ic Dev elopment Program and I think that's a real shame. Now, we don't know now tha t it wi ll be Manitoba which wi ll be affected, but that's something that we want to find out about qu ickly.

The Western Econom ic Dev elopm ent Fund is being deferred to the extent of $92 million from the year 1982-83. We don't know how that wi ll im pact on us here in the west, but there are no si milar numb ers for other parts of Canada and so obvio usly we are con cerned. In terms of the loss in direct reve nue in ter ms of income taxation from personal inc ome tax or cor porate tax, we do not yet have a numb er. MR. SPE AKER: The Honour able Memb er for La Verendrye. MR . R. BAN MAN: In light of the que stions, Mr.

Speaker, to the Minister of Fi na nce, and I would ask him, in light of the staggering deficit announc ed yes terday and the huge borrowing requirements that the Federal Gov ernm ent is now going to have to under take, has the Minister done an assessment on wha t that wi ll do to the available capital within the country, as well as the demand that will place on that capital and ther efore probabl y have a fur ther adverse effect on the int erest rates? 3642 HON. V. SCHROEDER: We haven't fully assessed what the im pact wi ll be.

As the memb er knows, for the last several years there has been vir tually no borrow ing by the Province of Manitoba within Canada, because there hasn't been capital available. We have been requir ed to go outside of the countr y -(I nterje ctio n)- the Memb er for Morris ough t to be told that inclu des the previous gover nme nt. It wasn't only this govern ment that has been required to do tha t.

Th is $20 bi ll ion deficit which is, in per capita terms, double the deficit in the Un ited States is cer tainly someth ing that wi ll cause further difficu lty in terms of the ability of governments and corporations and indiv iduals to obtain capital.

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 MR. R. BAN MAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well then, in light of the fact that the Min ister has confirmed that this staggering defic it and the hug e borrowings that will be requir ed to cover deficits, not only on the fed eral but on the provi ncial levels, is going to eat up available capit al and is going to make capit al scarce for even indus try to expand and to under take the very necessary job creation type of programs, in other words. develo pment that's going to be un dertaken in this provin ce; in light of the fact that this mone y will not be available, would the Minis ter not agree that what effect this total package will have will be really to drive up in terest rates, because there won't be enough money ar ound to meet all the requir em ents that the governm ents are going to be faced with becaus e of these staggering deficits?

HON. V. SCHROEDER: In terest rates may go up. On e of the reasons they will go up is that we have been follow ing a mone tarist policy in Ottawa sin ce 1975 and in the last sever al years the supply of money has not been in cre asing, even at the rate of inf lation. Sur ely, the memb er would recog ni ze that would have something to do with int erest rates. The fact that ther e will be more borr owi ng by the Federal Gov ernme nt would natu rally have some thing to do with in terest rates, as well.

I'm su re, as the rece ssion carries on and corporations become more cash poor and are requir ed to borrow more money, that will also have an impact on int erest rates in the cou ntry. MR . SPEA KER: The Honour able Memb er for The Pas. MR. H. HARAPIAK: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Min ister of Natu ral Resour ces. Under the previous admin istrat ion, there was a comm ittee struck to deal with multi-land use of the Saskeram area and I thought that was a good idea. a good way to deal with a di fficult situ ation.

Recently, the comm ittee made a decision not to cut hay un less there was an em er gency situa tion. Due to the poor growing conditions in Northern Man itoba, a numb er of farmers have app lie d for permit s to cut hay in the Saskeram ar ea and they have been denied. I am wondering if the Min ister would consider that as an emergency situa tion . MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Natu ral Resour ces. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the honour able memb er for giving me notice of the ques tion.

I have had representations made by the memb er and by others in conne ction with this problem whi ch is one of long standi ng. The Saskeram area is one that hope fully can provide the needs and meet the needs of multi-use, in cl uding the farming and wildlife pro tection and wildlife hab itat. Each of the demands has to be eval uated carefully. I have indi cated that I am prepared, and our govern ment is prepared, to look at these demands .

If there is legiti macy to the problem in respect to hay in the north, obvio usly we are going to have to consider some harvest ing within that area. but that is some thing that I hope very shor tly I will be ab le to go up to The Pas area; I'll have a look at it personally and I'll have an opportu ni ty to talk fur ther with people up there. Wh ile I'm on my feet, Mr. Speaker-(l nterje ction) well, this is a good time for haying in the Province of Man itoba; that's true . Mr.

Speaker, whi le I'm on my feet, the other day a que stion was addr essed to the Min ister of Ind ustry and Tourism ab out how people. nonr esidents, woutd know about a restriction of fish ing on Molson Lake. I would like to in dicate that the restrict ion applies to nonr esidents of Canada; that is, Manitobans and Canadians can -(l nterje ct ion) well, Mr. Speaker, on the opposite side. we have some knowledge about the beverage ind ustry. I won't make further com ment on that except, Mr.

Speaker, I want to make it very clear that in respect to fish ing on Molson Lake, whi ch is one of many thous ands of lakes that are available for nonr esidents to fish, is agains t nonr esidents of Canada. Man itobans and other Can adi ans can fish in Molson Lake, but there was a con cern to provide a contin uance of economic activity in cert ain of these areas of the north and it was sug gested that, as a pilot, we look at the provision that guiding would have to be necessary on that lake, so that is why the restri ction is ther e.

In respect to those nonr esidents, when they buy their lice nce. they will note that restri ction. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Turtle Moun ta in. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, the que stion simply had been: what inf ormation was available th rough the Tou rist Inf ormation Booths to fishermen co ming in to Canad a. I don't believe there is any in forma tion available in the Tou rist Booth; it would probably be a good idea to have in formation there as well. In respect to the situation in the Sasker am, Mr.

Speaker, will the Min ister be making the decision per sonally as to whether or not to allow hay ing to take place in that area? 3643 HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, respons ib ility for a decision in respect to hay harve sting ulti mately rests with govern ment and the Mi nis ter in volved, and I won't try to duck that responsi bility, but I will take advantage of the best advice that is gi ven to me, in cl uding an opportunit y to consult with the people most affec ted . MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Pem bin a. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Min ister of Ag ricul tur e.

During the review of the In terest Rate Relief Program, the Mini s ter un dertook to prov ide me with cert ain in formation on who had received assistance un der the Farm Pro gram and the Small Busi ness Progr am, as well as some detailed inf ormation on the parameters. Will the Min ister be making that inf ormation available to me today? MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Mi nis ter of Agriculture. HON. B. UR USKI: Not today, Mr. Speaker.

29 June, 1982 MR. D. OR CHARD: Like most things to do with the Minister of Agr icultu re, I have to co mm ent that he has failed miserably at providi ng even the smal lest amount of inform ation legitimately requested by mem bers of the Opposition. Now, Mr. Speaker . I have a que stion for the Minister of Transpor tatio n.

In view of the fact that the grants to the City of Winnipeg were increased so that transit fares in the City of Wi nn ipeg could be frozen, has the Minister of Transpor tation provided sufficie nt increase in grant to the hand icapped trans it systems in ru ral Man itoba, so tha t the user fares paid by disabled per sons in ru ral Manitoba wi ll likewise not rise this year? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Minister of Gov ernmen t Se rvices. HO N. S. US KIW: Mr. Speaker , I believe the Memb er for Pem bina is inde ed familiar with the hand icap tran sit syste m.

Tha t is supp orted by the Department of Trans port throughout all of ru ral Man itoba. Of course, we have had ample opportu nity to debate that que s tion during Estim ates Review and I don't recall tha t que stion being put at that ti me. I believe the fu nding is adequate for the moment, Mr. Speaker. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Then, is the Minister of Transp ort telling us that user fees paid by disabled people in ru ral Manitoba wi ll remain frozen for this year because of increased gr ants provided by his depar tmen t to the various hand icapped trans it systems in rur al Mani toba, in ag reement with the increased grant provided to the City of Wi nn ipeg to freeze transit fares for all users in Winnipeg, not ju st the hand icapped? HON. S. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, we did discuss this very point during Estima tes review and I don' t know what it is tha t the memb er is trying to sug gest that is new to the sit uati on.

We've had a full discussion on that question. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, I have a que stion to the Minister of Natural Resour ces.

In view of the request from the Memb er for The Pas, which I think is a reasonable request, and in view of the fact that the farmers and the wild life people of Ducks Un limited have shared the use of the Saskeram, I believe, if my me mory is correct, that during our term of office, the latter part, we were working out a mecha nism so tha t the farmers and those in divid ua ls could get into the Saskeram area eit her by bridge or, I think it was a barge tha t was being made ava ilable to tho se resi dents to get into that parti cular area. Is that being carr ied out?

Is tha t barge in place so tha t the citizens of that commu nity can cross the river and get into tha t hay meadow? MR . SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Natur al Resour ces. HO N. A. MACKLI NG: Mr. Speaker, it has been in di cated to me that histori cally, for the use of hayland across the river in the Saskeram area, that the ranchers have ju st led their cattle or the cattle have swam across the river.

To have a barge fixed at one point some several miles upstream or downstream, I'm not sure which it is, most farmers or most cattlemen wou ld find it far more convenient than herding the cattle some numb er of miles, to ju st have them go across the river as they did in the past. Ther e has been a barge ava ilable tha t was con structed by people up ther e and appar ently tha t has cont inued to serve the pu rpose of most of them. I am going to be going up th ere and I wi ll be looking at that situation.

Ther e are some differences of opinion as to the practical use of a barge and wh ether it really is desirable. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, tha t is one of the diffi cult ies that the people have when they go into that parti cular area to hay and that is access to it. Ther e has been a program approved; I think it was appr oved during our period. The qu estion is, has that barge been put in place? Because they need that barge to get the hay out, not necessarily to take the cattle in and out. We are aware of the fact that they can move back and forth across the river but, Mr.

Speaker, has the Minister put a barge in place so that there is access to that hay meadow? HON. A. MACKLI NG: Mr. Speaker, the Advisory Com mittee, that quite properly was established some ti me before I took office and this gove rnm ent took office, recomm ende d against the barge; that's why it isn't there. However, I have indi cated that I'm pre pared to look at that whole question and see what the proper resolution of some of those things would be. MR . J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of the fact that ther e isn't any access to that particular area.

I have a question for the Minister of Agr icultur e, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that he was going to introduce an Emer gency Beef Su pport Program after being ele cted last Novem ber, and ther e still hasn't been a program announ ced, when does the Minister of Agr icultur e plan to announ ce the program? Is it going to be a one-term payment, one-shot payment, or is it going to be the kind of program that a farmer has to sign up for six years; pay a 4 percent to 8 percent premiu m, a compu lsory gove rn ment ma rket ing program? He hasn' t given us many answers; I wonder, Mr.

Speaker, if the Mini ster could give us answers to those questions. MR . SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Agricultur e. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, to the Honour able Memb er for Arthur , the program that was announ ced wi ll be a volu ntary program ava ilable to all producers: Mr. Speaker, the Producer Advisory Gr oup, I am advised, wi ll be making their reco mmenda tions to myself and to the govern ment hopefully within a week to ten days. At that point in time, we will see what the reco mmenda tions are and make our decisions based on those recommenda tions, at which time the plan will be impl emented.

With respect to the que stions dealing with whether ther e will be a pay out, Mr. Speaker , tha t will be dealt 3644

with and is being dealt with in terms of the producers' recom mendatio ns. Ther e are varying opin ions on that, whether those funds should be used to assist in the prem ium s towards the program. Mr. Speaker, with respect to the len gth of time, ther e are other optio ns, as I' ve mentioned before, dealing with the cont ract provisions. The contr act could be an ongoing contract and those as pects are being dis cus sed by the producer group. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, a final question to the Minis ter.

Will he accept the recom mendations from the beef indu stry that have already been put in place to make a one -time payment of $45 or $50 per cow and forget about the kind of socialistic hanger-on clauses that he wants to hang on the beef ind ustry? Will he make that one-shot payment, Mr. Speaker? HON. B. UR USKI: Mr.

Speaker, it's kind of ironical that the Member for Art hur now deems a program, wher e ther e are premium cont ributio ns, ther e is a tim e frame, and ther e is a marketing plan involved in a program that is voluntary, is socialistic, when one exam ines tho se comme nts as co mpared to the pro gram that he brough t in dealing with the hog produc ers last year. So, it's kind of ironical that the hono ur able memb er speaks of it. With respect to the question of im mediate pay out, Mr. Speaker, that has been dealt with in this Chamb er before.

I told the honour able member and the members of this House that the Advisory Comm ittee, in their deliberations on that, were split in terms of whether or not ther e sho uld be an imm ed iate pay out or the money is used for people who enter the program. Based on the advice of the comm ittee, as divided as it was, Mr. Speaker, we have held back from that and the monies will be used at the tim e the program is announ ce d. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, a questio n di rected to the Minister of Natu ral Reso urces.

Aside from the hay and agricult ure interest at the Saskeram of cou rse, it is one of the better known areas for wildlife production. My question to the Minis ter is, how are the negotiations proceeding with Ducks Un lim ited with respect to their futur e management or role in the Saskeram gener ally? MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Minis ter of Natu ral Re sources. HON. A. MACKLI NG: Mr. Speaker, the hono urable member well knows that Ducks Un lim ited have a very su bstantial investment in wildlife management in all parts of Manitoba.

Wh ile we are concerned to make sure that those programs are maintained, we have to recognize the legiti mate concerns of agricul ture in this province as well. So there is a very -(In ter jecti on)- I hear some qua cki ng noises from the other side of the Chamb er, Mr. Speaker. Maybe it's the late hour s we've been keeping, but there is a li ttle bit of frivolity here that is maybe unnecessary. Mr. Speaker, there are ongoing concerns. Ther e are strong, strong views in respect to wildlife protection; there are strong views in respect to enhancement and 29 June, 1982 develop ment of agricul tur al potential.

It 's with those kinds of difficult strong posit ions that we have to find a com promise position, and we're certain that we c Jn work towards a resol utio n of tho se differences. MR. H. ENNS: I appreciate the Mi nis ter's, dissertation on what has always been the fact in Manitoba, the conflict between agricul tural or wildlif e views, but my question was simply, is he talking, is he negotiating with Ducks Un lim ited with respect to the futur e man ageme nt of the Saskeram area? Are you in a process of negotiatio n with them? HON. A. MACKLIN G: Mr.

Speaker, we are not nego tiating beca use ther e is no developme nt program that I am aware of in respect to Saskeram that Ducks Unlim ited are proposing. Ther e are no ch anges. Ther e is an existing situation that ther e are di fferen ces in respect to. Ther e were demands for reductio n in the size of the Saskeram by the farming com munity; there are demands that the water level be reduced so that more agri cultur e can take place; there is a con cern and an insi stence on the part of Ducks Un lim ited and others that water levels should not be reduced because wildlife habitat is needed there. MR. H.

ENNS: The fact of the matter is that a lengthy long-te rm lease that Ducks Un lim ited has in that area of Saskeram is running out. I believe it is up for rene wal in 1983, whi ch is upon us in terms of this kind of a situation. The Minister has already all uded to the many millio ns of dollars of investment that Ducks Un lim ited have in the area. My question is, is he not carrying on, or is his department not curr ently involved in, rene gotiating a fur ther long-term management lease for the management of wildlife in that area with Ducks Un lim ited? HON. A. MACKLI NG: Mr.

Speaker, my depart ment is looking at all of these concerns and considerations, the concerns of all interests in respect to that area, and we will be announcing our policy decisions in due cou rse. 3645 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Tu rtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Min ister of Natu ral Reso urces as well.

Due to the fact that the Ind ian Band at The Pas has a long stan ding interest in the Saskeram area, and that arr angements were entered into in 1964 when the Sum merberry area was flooded, which gave some special signi ficance then to the Saskeram area as an area wher e mi tig ation would be carried out as comp ensation for the flooding of Sum merberry, my question to the Min ister would be, has he personally had an opportunity to meet with The Pas Ind ian Band to discuss the futur e of the Sas kerarn area? HO N. A. MACKLI NG: Mr. Speaker, the short answer is no, I have not.

I certainly inte nd, before any decision is made that could vit ally affect any interest group there, to consult. I want to ind icate that I am aware of the fact that in respect to the Saskeram, when I talk about wildlif e, we're not talking simp ly about wild

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 fowl. Ther e is a very su bstanti al concern in respect to the contin uation of fur marketing for muskr ats in that area. MR . SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Tux edo. MR . G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, my que stion is for the Honour ab le Minister of Energy and Mines. Mr. Speaker, I am given to und ersta nd that there are some people who have had urea-formaldehyde foam ins ula tion placed in their home s with the use of a Mani toba Hydro lo an.

In some particular ins tances, as a result of health problems in the family, they have at their own expense had their foam removed and replaced, but they still have to pay off the loans to Mani toba Hydro for the in stallat ion. It seems rather un fair that they have paid $1 0,000 in itially to have the ins ulation ins talled and an other $8,000 to have it removed, and now they're still having to pay off the loan to the Hydro. I wonde r if the Minister can look into this, or if he has looked into it, if he could jus t tell us what the Hydro's position is on the matter. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honou rable Minister of Ener gy and Mines. HON. W. PARA SIUK: Mr. Speaker, on this issue, this was a matter which we believe certainly is the Feder al Governm ent's respon sibility. We believe that in that position we are no different than the previous government. Ther e has been no change in policy on that. We believe that it's the Feder al Gov ernmen t's responsi bility to deal with a matter that in many respects, I think, has been sadly neglected by the Feder al Go vern ment.

If in deed all of these people were living in one geogr ap hic area, I would think that, ju st as with a flood or anything like that, it would probably be declared a disaster area and appropr iate federal assista nce would be provided. That hasn't been the case to date, al though it appears that there has been some moderation of the federal positi on. We believe that this is enti rely a federal responsib il ity Manitoba Hydro has acted as a con duit. They do have bills outstanding.

We believe that the consu mers, all the Hydro ratepayers in Manitoba, shou ld not · be su bsidizi ng particular people who have taken out loans. It is Manitoba Hydro's position that the bills should in deed be repaid by in dividuals who owe Mani toba Hydro money. MR . G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I know that the matter is one in which the responsi bility, the prime responsi bility, certainly rests wit h the Feder al Gov ern ment. Bu t I am aware of this particular ins tance, as I say, in which the in dividual has paid for the rem oval with no help of the Feder al Governm ent's program or assist anc e.

Alt hough the Mini ster and his colle ague s in Cabinet are always looking to put the respons ib ility onto the Feder al Gov ernmen t, in this particular case Mani tob a Hydro is the agent from whom the loan was obtained and under whose program the loan was obtai ned. It seems to me that the Mini ster, wi thout the assista nce of the Feder al Govern ment, could make a decision that would be, I think, fair and reasonable treat ment for this particular in dividual and others who are in the same ci rcum stances. It is Mani toba Hydro and it is within his jur isdiction to make that decision at the mom ent.

It is they who are causing this person to cont inue to pay for something that has long since been removed and thr own away. HO N. W. PARA SIUK: Mr. Speaker, Ma nitoba Hydro acted as a cond uit for this program in providing assis tance. If the memb er is sayi ng that all cons umer s of Mani toba Hydro, that is the Hydro ratepayers, should provide particular and specific su bsidies to those people who used Hydro as a cond uit to put in urea-formaldehyde in their home s, fine. I wish he would ask that as a specific question, because that is really the intent of what he is aski ng. MR .

SPEAKER: The Honour ab le Memb er for Roblin-Ru ssell. MR . W. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, I have a qu estion for the Honour able Mini ster of Agricul tur e. Mr. Speaker, in response to the answer as given by the Mini ster of Agriculture a few mome nts ago to the Honour able Memb er for Arthur regarding the hog program in this province, can the Minister assur e the House and the hog prod ucers in this province that he is going to cont inue with that program which he said is fulf illi ng the needs of the producers in this province? MR . SPEAKER: The Honou rab le Mini ster of Agriculture. HON . B. URU SKI: Mr.

Speaker, the program is con ti nu ing to its length that was earlier announ ced. MR. SPEAK ER: Order please. Thet ime for Oral Que s tions having expired, Orders of the Day. ORDERS OF THE DAY ORDERS FOR RETURN MR. SPEA KER: Orders for Return. The Honour able Memb er for Rh ine land. MR. A. BROWN: I beg to move, seconded by the Member for Ro blin-R ussell, that an Order of the House do issue for the Return of the followi ng inf ormation: 1.

The log of all Gove rnmen t of Mani toba aircr aft show ing passenger lists, dates, destinations and pur poses for all flights from Nove mber 30, 1981 to the date of this Order. 2. The numb er of aircr aft char tered or leased by Governm ent and Crown agenc ies during the period November 30, 1981, to the date of this Order, and the date of each flight, the passenger lists, the purpose of the charter or lease and the costs of the said char ter or lease. MOTION presented and carried. MR . SPEAK ER: The Honour able Memb er for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I beg to move, seconded by the Honour able Memb er for Assi niboia, that an Order of the Hous e do issue for the 3646

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 return of the following in formation : The travel and expense allo wance paid for or on behalf of all mem bers of the Exec utive Council and all memb ers of any Board , Comm ission or Agency of the Government of Man itoba for the period from November 30, 1981 , to the date of this order. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Lakeside. MR . H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker , I beg to move, seconded by the Memb er for Eme rson, that an Order of the House do issue for the return of the foll owing in formation: 1.

Name s of all emp loyees of the Executive Council to whom Man itoba Government vehicles were assigned from Nov emb er, 1977, to November 30, 1981. 2. Names of all emp loyees of Executive Coun cil to whom Man itoba Go vern men t vehicle s have been assig ned from November 30, 1981 , to the date of this order. MOTION presented and carried. MR . SPEAK ER: The Hon ourable Govern ment House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, would you please ca ll the Adjou rned De bate on Second Reading of Bill No. 62 as it appears on page 8 of the Or der Paper?

ADJOURNED DEBATES ON SECOND READING Bill NO. 62- THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT MR. SPE AKER: On the proposed motion of the Hon ourable Member for St. Norb ert, Bill No. 62, standing in the name of the Honou rable Min ister of Govern ment Services. HO N. S. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I want to jus t make mention of the fact that I appre ciate that the Memb er for St. Nor bert is well motivated in in tr oducing that amend ment to The Highw ay Traffic Act. I'm also min dful, Mr.

Speaker, of the fact that we have a comm ittee at work that is to report to myself with respect to all modes of handi capped vehicles that we will want to li cence or appr ove in due cou rse. For that reason. beca use I think it wou ld be prudent to receive that report before we proceed with any further amend ments in this area, I am going to ind icate to member s opposite that we at this time do not propose to accept this bill, bu t will be in troducing a com pre hen sive appr oach to this ques tion at the next Session. MR . SPE AKER: The Honour able Govern ment House Leader. HON. R. PENNER: Mr.

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Min ister of Muni cip al Affairs ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Is there any other member wishin g to speak to the bill before it is adjo urned? The Honour able Memb er for Pem bina. MR . D. ORCHARD: Wel l, Mr. Speaker, the Min ister has made com ment that he has a comm ittee that's studying all modes of handi capped transit, but this amend ment, if accepted and passed, cou ld occur that way with the provision attac hed to it that it's pro claime d at a later date pendin g the report of this com mittee.

This is a proposal th at I made last year in The Hig hway Traffic Act and was tu rned down at that time by the Opposition. It has a lot of merit in passing the amend ment, proclai ming it at a later date if necessary; but my colle ague, the Opposition House Leader . says at least they're cons istent. Wel l, I sugge st they aren't consistent, because we have the Min ister of Health bringing in a bill deal ing with lotteries that he wants today prior to the report of a comm ittee stud ying lotteries and he's bringing in a bill.

Now the Min ister of Transpor tation doesn't want to accept this rather sim ple amend ment, which cou ld be proclaimed later, and have it on the books so that if his comm ittee reports in Ju ly and says this is the cour se of action that should be under ta ken, the Mini s ter would have the legisl ative autho rity to procla im at that ti me.

In one case with lotteries, they will bring in legisl a tion that they don't in tend to use un til after a com mi t tee reports and in this case, wh ere it deals with handi capped transit potentials in terms of the vehicles they can use, this Min ister and this govern ment as the y did in Opposition. are opposed to it.

I sug gest that the very simp le way of proceed in g with this is to pass the amendme nt and have an overrid ing clause that shall not be procla im ed un til his comm ittee reports, beca use I'm sur e his comm ittee is going to find that ame nd ment very much fits their desir es and I would make that sug gestion to the Min ister of Tr anspor tation and to the Gov ernmen t House Leader for very serio us cons ideration. MR . SPEAKER: The Honour able Atto rney-Gener al. HO N. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the Min ister of Mu ni cip al Affai rs, that the debate on this bill be now adjou rned.

MOTION presented and carried. 3647 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able House Leader. HO N. R. PENN ER: Mr. Speaker, I move. seconded by the Mini ster of Muni cip al Affairs. that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the Hous e resolve itself in to a Comm ittee to conside r of Ways and Means for raising of the Sup ply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself in to a Commi ttee to consider of Ways and Means for raising of the Su pply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honour ab le Memb er for the Pas in the Chair.

COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS SUPPl Y - MAIN SUPPl Y Bill NO. 48- THE APPROPRIATION ACT, 1982 MR . CHAIR MAN, H. Harapiak: The Comm ittee will

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 come to order. We will cont inue with the Main Supply Motion. The Memb er for Tu rtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am of cou rse inte rested now to pur sue the que stion which was placed in question period about the im pact of new federal calcul atio ns upon the revenue s of the pro vince.

Given the fact that the Feder al Gov ernment had been projecting a deficit seven months ago of a range of $1 O billion that has now risen to a projection of close to $20 bill ion, and that the Federal Govern ment's borrowing requ irements in that period of time had gone from $6.6 billion now to, I believe, $17. 1 billi on, can the Minister of Finance now give us any in dication of where he would expect reve nue s of the province to be reduc ed from the calculations that the Feder al Go vern men t provided six months ago, if indeed he expects them to be reduced? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honour able Minister of Finance.

HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Chai rman, the area wh ere we would expect, if there would be a decr ease and it is more likely than not that there will be a decrease, that area would be in corporate income taxes as opposed to personal income taxes or corpo rate capital tax or the other gen eral taxes. The amoun t is still something that, as I indicated, Ottawa will be providing us with the figu res sometime before th e end of sum mer , but ther e were no such fig ur es in the Bud get papers, the background papers that were presented last night. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr.

Chairma n, what would the Min ister's intention be with respect to making inform ation known if the calculations that had previou sly been provided by the Feder al Govern ment proved to have been altered signi fica ntly, or will the Minister be releasi ng that information soon after he gets it or will he be waiting un til the next Quar terly Report before giving that in dicat ion? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr.

Chai rman, I am advised that since the quar terly reporting system was put into place, ther e have been no revisi ons in the first quarter, even though there may have been in dications that there will be changes. It 's ordinar ily happened that any revis ions were made after the second quar ter. When those numb ers become available from Ottawa, I would presu me, however, that they will be going right across the countr y and I can't imagine them remaining secret.

My inc lination would be to release them at the time that we receive the official figures from Ottawa in order that people can see wh at is happening here and it's very easy to relate tho se numb ers or any changes to what will occur with our finan cial position at the end of the year. MR . B. RANSOM: Mr. Chairman, I would hope the Minister would pur sue that cou rse of action and make the informa tion kn own, beca use if he is to wait un til the Se pte mb er Quar terly Re port come s out in November, and it would be some ti me before we would be aware of what was happen ing.

I fear, alt hough I hope it's not the case, that the reve nu es as set out in the detailed Estimates of Rev enue are hig her than revenues are actua lly going to be. I would per sonally judge that there is a good chance or a bad chance, depending on how you look at it, that revenues are going to be reduc ed by tens of millions of dollars from the Estimates which we have before us at the moment. Mr.

Cha irman, there is one que stion that I would like to ask arisi ng out of the preli minary finan cial state ment, which was released yesterday, and that is the figur e on page 2, which shows the gr oss direct debt of the province having incr eased by $645,000,461 in 1982 over 1981 . That's not ent irely clear in my mind ju st how we would have that magni tude of incr ease in the direct debt of the province at a time when our deficit was $250 mill ion. HO N. V. SCH ROEDER: Mr.

Cha irman, first of all, there was some catch-up element; that is, ther e was some borrowing for past author ity, but the gen eral pu rpose debt went up by $41 o million and the self sustaining by $235 mill ion, self-sustaining being the Crown corporatio ns. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Chairman, I'll have to ask the Minister to repeat that, and if I could ask my colle ague, the Memb er for Pemb ina, and the Minister of Agricul tur e to cease and desist from their exchange here. The sound system doesn't seem to be working quite right and it's rather difficult to hear. HO N. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr.

Chai rman, again, I shou ld start off by saying again that there was some catc hup , there was an element of catc hup in volved in the borrowing from previous author ity, but the gen er al pu rpose debt was $4 10 mill ion of the $645,4 61 ,0 00.00 Then the Crown corporations was $235 millio n, and I could break that down some more: $12 7 million of that was Hydro and $72 million was Telephones and then smaller amount s were other organ izatio ns. MR . B. RANSOM: Mr.

Chairman, the catchup, which the Minister refers to in gen eral pu rpose, it was my und erstand ing that it had not been the intention of the government origin ally to borrow that amoun t of money to show in this way as going into direct debt. At the ti me that the Bu dget was tabled a year ago, the bor rowing requirements were not that hig h, so I'm wond ering was this done to take mone y out of shor t term and put it into long term, because it happene d to be opportune at the time. 3648 HO N. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, there were short-term liabilities conver ted into long term and that is the reason for the difference. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Chairman, so the effect of that decisio n, having been made after we had left govern ment, which may well have been a correct one from the point of view of financing will end up showing a higher direct debt for the province for the year 1981- 82 than had been anticipated in the Bu dget in the previous year. Mr. Ch ai rman, I'd like to ask the Minister a few questions arising from the debate that's taking place

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 in the House ever since the Session began and con ti nu ed to some extent this morning duri ng question period and that has to do with the question of in terest rates. I 'm inte rested in knowing what sort of position the govern ment is going to be putt ing forward on Wednesday when they meet with the other First Mi nis ters of the count ry.

Given the fact that the federal borrowi ng requirements have now gone from 6.6 bil lion to 17.1 bi ll ion, I expect tha t Manitoba and the othe r provi nces are also going to find thems elves with larger borrowing requirements than they have an tici pated; given the fact that the Federal Gove rn ment has over the past year or two been requiring in the range of 80 percent of all the capitals that is available in Can ada; given those circums tances, I would be interested in knowing what position the governme nt is going to be putting forward that would somehow show a rational route that the Fede ral Go vernme nt could fol low in attempting to bring interest rates down.

We all would very much like to see reduced interest rates, but I don' t think it's good enou gh si mply to talk about it and to say that they shou ld bring interest rates down. I think ever yone is in terested in looking at any sugge stion that anyone might have that could con ceivably re sult in lower interest rates, but the sug ges tion has got to be something that makes sense from an intellectual point of view and makes sense from the way the real system works.

So since the Hous e may well not be sitti ng after the First Mi nister returns from this meeting on Wednes day, perhaps the Mi nister of Finance could outline the position of his gove rn ment to the Com mittee. HO N. V. SCHROEDER: The memb er in dicates that we would all like a red uction in interest rates and, of course, he is correct.

That is the policy that in our view has put us to a large extent in the position where we now are, where people are ju st not prepared to spend money, where people can't afford to go and borrow money for consu mer items, for business pur poses, for business expansions, and certai nly the gove rn ment is in a position that's similar to other players in the scene. We have some con cern that what is happening is that we are not going to be going back to lower interest rates when you see, for instance, Ont ario Hydro floating a 30-year issue at someth ing like 17 percent.

When you see other large corporate issue rs getting into si mila r lon g-term com mitments at hig h in terest rates, it al most see ms as though one might despair of getting lower in terest rates and yet, as long as we have these rates, we are going to cont inue to have a great deal of difficu lty in getting the econ omy going. Now, over the weekend, I had an opportu nity to do a little bit of reading and the re's an in terview of Paul Sam uelson, the economist, who wrote some books on eco nomi cs that all first-year economic students have stu died over the years.

He was referri ng to the atte mpt to control the rate of mone y growth in the way it is being done in the Un ited States and Canada and the th eories behi nd it as shibbole ths. He said that the mone tarist policy that has taken over on this continent since the mid-1 970s has been a destructive policy. We've been saying that thro ugh out and in so saying I recognize, as the Mem ber for Turtle Mou ntain well knows, tha t we canno t comple tely march to our own dru mmer; that is, that we are affected by the policies of our neighbour.

That having been said, we are nevertheless a couple of percentage points above our nei ghbou r. We are not below our neig hb our. Although you might say we're tracking them, we're trac king from above rathe r than below. When they talk about the causes, when the federal people talk about the causes, they say yes, it's not wages, but that's the only pla ce where we can hit.

They don't talk about oi l; they don't talk about energy; they don't talk about the fact that in a month or so we're going to have another in crease in that cost which is anothe r hug e tran sfer paymen t out of the Province of Manitoba and into the Provinces of Sas katchewan and Al berta. They don' t refer to that as being at all the cause of infl ation or higher interest rates in the cou ntry, and in the ir backgr ound papers and in the Budg et, they talk about restraints on all kinds of public sector com ponents, public trans porta tion.

They talk about food costs, etc., commun ica tions, as being areas where they wi ll adhe re t-0 a 6 percent and 5 percent gu ideline, but they don' t say that with respect to energy. They seem to specific ally want to avoid that one in terms of having any relation to the problem that we are having.

Previously there was reference made, I believe, to the fact that in Man itoba the public service over the last five years has had pay raises tha t ha ve in total been 4.9 percent below the total infla tion rate during that time, so the average public servant in 1982 is about 4.9 percent worse off than they were in 1977 in Manitoba. That surely is an ind ication that they aren't the ones who have been caus ing the inflation. I think that if you looked at the wages of Mem bers of Parliament tha t the re would be a different num ber; that is, they would be well above infl ation.

Mem bers of the Legislature, in com paris on, have not been adding to in fla tion because of the type of formul a that we have with respect to our inc rease which is based on the average indu strial wage in the province. So I think those kinds of things have to be looked at seriously in terms of whom are we hitti ng when we're dealing with those kinds of controls.

Are we hitting the causes or are we ju st firing away and hitting anything that might hap pen to be in the way. 3649 Getting back to the in terest rates which was the que stion that the mem ber asked about and availa bility of capita l, we haven't had capital available for us in Canada for a num ber of years. I don't see any cha nce of us having capital ava ilable - now I should say other than Al berta and the Canada Pension Plan, and tha t's short term. Other than that, we've not been able to go to the pu blic markets in Canada or have felt tha t we would n't be able to pick up money.

We're in no differ ent a position now. I supp ose the only - well, I shouldn't say no different - we are in a worse position in that we now obvio usly wi ll have more com petition when we go for the American dolla r, the Euro dol lar or othe r currenc ies. Whe ther this amount of inc rease in one cou ntry's deficit would have any kind of a signif i cant bearing on world int erest rates which is where we wi ll be going to the markets where the money is, I rea ll y haven't got any in formation on that. MR . B. RANSOM : Mr. Chairman, I am not especia lly in terested in debating the Federal Bu dget with the

29 June, 1982 Minister, I am interested in some specific positions which I a ssume this government is going to have to take, some issues they're going to have to take posi tions on. I'll lay out some qu estions here then for the Minister, and hopefu lly whe n he answers, he'll address them. When the governm ent and the First Minister goes to Ottawa tomo rrow, is he going to be saying to the Federal Go vernment, for instance, that they should cut taxes? I believe this is the position tha t's being put forward by the federal Ne w Demo cratic Party at the moment.

They're sugg esting tha t the governm ent should be cu tting taxes, and they shou ld be spending more money. Is the First Minister going to be urging the Federal Govern ment to loosen up its spending and to spend more money tha n they are now on job crea tion or stimu lating the hous ing ind ustry or wha tever? Are they going to at the same time be advocating tha t they cut taxes whi ch, of course, if it took place would result in an even larger federal deficit?

In view of the fact then tha t the deficit is as large as it is now and depending on the position tha t the gov ernment takes, if the reco mmenda tions were followed, it would be even larger. The refore, what wi ll the gov ernment be reco mmending with respe ct to interest rates? Wi ll they be sugge sting to the Federal Govern ment that they reduce interest rates to a rate that's eq ual to the prime rate in the U.S., to a rate that's 2 percent under or do they also agree, as I believe is the position of the federal New Democratic Party, tha t interest rates shou ld be only 1 percent above infla tion?

Wha t position wi ll they be taking with res pect to infla tion? Wha t are they going to be tel ling the Federal Governm ent on Wednesday and the ir colleagues? Are they saying, abandon the fight ag ainst infl ation, or are they saying fight infl ation by some partic ula r course of action? Mr. Ch airman, these are very troubled economic times for the province and for the coun try, and it's a ti me for some very serious debate and well though t out positions and not a ti me for posturing by govern ments.

People are looking for some leadership; they had hoped that they were going to get leadership last night in the Budg et. I am not sure that the pub lic is going to feel that they did receive tha t sort of leade r- · ship. Now I am interested in knowing what kind of leadership this government is going to provide whe n they go to Ottawa tomorrow. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Wel l, Mr.

Ch airman, I do have to say that althou gh we haven't yet had our govern mental get-together in terms of exactly what we wi ll be saying tomo rrow - we do have time between now and the n - I do have to say that certain ly I am not very im pressed with the stimula tive measures taken by the Federal Government.

They are on the one hand adding taxa tion or red ucing pay outs in the grand total amou nt of $3.042 billio n over the two-year period and are putting back in, in total with all of those stim ula tive programs, $2.3 16 billion for a net decrease of federal expenditures, be they increases in tax or decreases in pay out, the net impa ct being a decrease of $726 milli on in federal expenditures. So tha t anyone who watched Mr. MacEache n there and though t that they saw a man delivering a stim ul ative bu dget, a stimu la tive program for the coun try for a two-year period, was seeing a mirage; it wasn't the re.

The re may be specific areas that wi ll be stimula ted but, on the other hand, there are other areas where there are more tax colle ctions or lesser pay outs to more tha n make up for the new initiatives tha t the government has decided to enter into. It is my view, certain ly, tha t we should have been looking at areas of expenditure tha t we do need in the long run; things such as moving ahead with upgrading of rail facilities in the west; things such as im proving hous in g; im provin g some of the large city core areas, areas tha t wou ld in the long run provide us with a return on our investment.

I know the mem bers are concerned about interest rates. On the other hand, as I indicated previo usly, there appears to be a long-term trend toward high interest rates and I'm not exactly sure when, interna tion ally, they rea lly wi ll come down. If these are the rates we have. we should be looking at what we can be doing tha t wi ll provide us with returns on our invest ment in the long term.

No w, in terms of the im pact of tha t kind of program - jus t before I leave the area of the increases in taxes by the Federal Govern ment or decreases in expe nditures by the Federal Government, although the Memb er for Turtle Mountain is talking broad brush - we have to talk broad brush occasion ally - I su ppose I'm looking at it from a narrower perspective when I'm looking at this paper.

Because whe n I'm looking at it, I'm seeing areas that are going to vi tally affect Manitoba; the Native Economic Dev elopme nt Program deferral of $45 milli on for this year and $40 mil lion for the next year for a total of $85 mil lion; the $92 mil lion for the 1982-83 Western Economic Dev elopme nt Fund defer ral; developme nt assistance reductions of $17 5 mil lion. Tho se kinds of things wi ll surely affect what wi ll hap pen in the Province of Mani toba.

So tho se are areas tha t I have, init ially since last night, been thi nking about in terms of a response to the Federal Governm ent, because while the Federal Minister of Finance and all of us should be looking at total im pacts, some of us also have to look at those individ ual items. If we have one kick at the cat, and I'm not parti cula rly happy about the timing of it, then we have to be sure tha t we are prepared for those items.

Tha t is, all we have had basica ll y is we wi ll have had less tha n 24 hours of preparation time before we're on the aircraft going to Ottawa after a Bud get that too k, one wou ld expect, a num ber of weeks to prepare. Ou r response has to come and I su ppose mem bers of the Opp osition would ex pect our response to deal with Manitoba and so those are areas that we're looking at.

If the Federal Govern ment had listened to the Pre miers back in February about interest rates and failed to contin ue to artifici ally prop up the dolla r and failed to contin ue to throw in all kinds of money, in so doing we co uld have had a dolla r that would be probably in the area that it is now with lower interest rates. Because if we wo uld have done it then, we could have had our lower interest rates. There were articles, jus t recent ly in the financial papers as wel l, referring back to that as a moment when the Federal Government lost its nerve and didn't do something tha t would have worked.

They didn't do it and now we have the worst of both wor lds. We have the lower dolla r and we don't have the advantage of having the lower interest rate. 3650

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 So we got it on both ends and we have also, on a third front, lost a lot of reven ue in propping up the dol lar for that period of time. Inf lation, wel l, it seems to me that whe n you look at the cause of th is round of inflation, you have to look at energy prices as much as at any other cause. That is certain ly not something that the government ap pears to be prepared to come to grips wit h, but the back bench is certainly co ming to grips with it right now. It may very well be that we will have a comple te official policy ava ilable for you before this very Session ends.

I do have to say to the mem ber that we've been more concentrating on swimmi ng than what we're going to do once we get to the boat. MR. B. RANSOM: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Wel l, I can unde rstand that the government hasn't had an opportun ity to review the Bu dget in detail and take a position on the Bu dget but, quite frankly, Mr. Chair man, I am shocked to hear that the Minister at this point doesn't have a firm proposal to make whe n they go to Ottawa tomorrow.

People in this province, in this House, have been led to believe that the governme nt had a workable plan that could re sul t in interest rates being lower than they are and that's the sort of plan that everybody would like to know about these days. Now, the Minister is telli ng me that he doesn't have a position worked out, yet I take it that they don't agree with the monetary poli cy of the Federal Government, which I again ta ke to mean that they co uld on ly be looking to have the monetary supply increase; that the government should in fact be printing more money than it is now.

Is that a recom mendation that the prov ince is going to be making to the Federal Govern ment? Are the y going to recomme nd a le vel , a target, that the Federal Govern ment shou ld be trying to attain? The Minister himself says he doesn't know. He can't begin to foresee when the international interest rates are going to fal l.

I agree with him that's something that he can't predict, but given that they are as hig h as they are and I believe he said that Ontario Hydro had entered into a 30-year loan for in the range of 17 percent; if the international market is that hig h and if Can ada's borrowing requirem ents are as colossal as they are and the Federal Governme nt running a deficit at twice the rate the national govern ment of the 'Jnited States is running the ir deficit; given these kinds of circ um stances, does the Minister see how the domes tic interest rates can be significant ly lowered from where they are now? HON. V.

SCHROEDER: Wel l, Mr. Chairman, I do believe that if we would have, as I said earlier, we should get away from the poli cy of monetar ism, the policy that thinks that you can have some kind of a formul a that has never been demonstrated to work. I think that we shou ld be getting away from th at. I've also said that I believe that in all practicality unless we could set up very very stringent exchange cont rols it would be practica lly im possible to be very much below United States interest rates because we are so clo sely connected with the United States.

Going only on comple tely indepe nde nt interest rate policy would be a very diffic ul t proposition. On the othe r hand, I don't believe that we need to remain at 3651 interest rates that are above Ame rican rates and then turn around and blame the Americans because we have hig h interest rates. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Chairman, I'm not going to pursue this point much fur the r. I gue ss a couple of qu estions in this area that I'd like to ask the Minister then.

Given the borrowing requireme nts that Canada has and the provinces have, that the cities have and the private sector has, does the Minister not agree that it is totally unreal istic to think that Canada can have a "Made in Canada" interest policy when we have those colossal borrowings which must take place outside the co untry? Is it possible, in any way, to think that we cou ld have exchange controls in Canada when we're borrowing tens of bil lions of dol lars outside the cou ntry? HON V. SCHROEDER: I don't believe that exchange controls are im possible.

I've said that we can't have an interest rate poli cy that is comple tely independe nt of what is happe ning outside the co untry. I think that we have to recognize that we are a part of an interde pendent system out there, so what hap pens out there will surely in flue nce what happe ns in Canada. But I do believe that we can be more inde pendent and creative than we have been until this point. MR . CHAIRMAN: I wonder if we could have a little order. We're having a little diffic ul ty hearing with all the conversations that are going on. The Memb er for Turtle Mountain. MR. B. RANSOM: Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, I appre ciate your intervention and especia lly whe n we're try ing to deal with issues that are of such significance as those that we were tal king ab out this morning. Mr. Chairman, I jus t would like an assur ance from the Minister, in that shou ld the Hous e not be sitting when he returns, and the First Minister returns from Ottawa, that they wou ld undertake to distri bute to the mem bers of the House any material which is pres ented to the conference in Ottawa so that we'll be aware of the position that the government has take n.

I have a specific qu estion before I turn the ques tion ing over to some of my col league s, Mr. Chairman. In the Bud get docume nt which the Minister tabled the night of his Bu dget presentation, there was a ta ble, Table 1, in Appendix (

c) in the Budge t which, Mr. Chairman, I have to say was a misleading table. I think, if the Minister looks at it care full y, he wi ll see that. The table is headed "I llus trations of the Effect of Manito ba's Personal In come Tax Su rtax ." Then it proceeds to sho w, Mr. Chairman, how vari ous tax filers act ually get more money as a consequence of the surtax being put in place. Now, I find it very diffic ul t. Mr. Chairman, let me jus t pass the Budge t over to the Minister here if he doesn't have a copy, and he can look at this ta ble.

The table leaves the im pression that people are actu ally getting more money as a consequence of the government im posing a surtax on inco me. Now, I believe what actually is taking place, Mr. Ch airman, is because there were changes as a consequence of the Federal Bu dget of Novem ber 12th which wou ld reduce the income taxes paid by certain groups of people, that in fact the tax filers would be paying less tax

29 June, 1982 becaus e of that. The Provincial Government moved in, in some cases, to take up some of the slack. Now the qu estion is, Mr. Chairman, aside from the nature of that ta ble, what effect is the move by the Federal Government to partial de-indexation going to have upon tax filers in Manitoba? How badly are the people who are going to be paying the surtax going to be hit now in Manitoba, because we've got both the sur tax and the partial de-indexation bro ught in last ni ght by Mr. MacEachen? HO N. V.

SCHROEDER: I would say, first of all, that I agree with the Mem ber for Turtle Mountain that, although the ta ble is correct, the label ling of the ta ble as "I llus trations of the Effect of Manitoba's Personal Income Tax Surtax" is misleading in that it appears to indicate that for most tax filers the surtax wi ll give them a benefit. It wi ll do no such thi ng . What the heading should have said was "Illu strations of the Effect of Ind exation and the Surtax on Manitoba Tax filers ." That's No. 1.

No. 2, - with respect to the partial de-indexation of income taxes my unde rstanding is that begins in the next tax year, for 1983. The re's thr ee months of this, the '82-83 tax year that would be affected but I unde r stand there's what, a two-month delay? It had been exp lained to me in such a way that if there were any benefits in terms of revenues to the province that we would receive about one month's revenues out of it for '82-83.

The reven ue, the calcu lations for all of Canada are that the re would be an additional $16 0 million to the Federal Government for '82-83, and $1 .14 bil lion for '83-84 in a full year. The $16 0 mil lion - I wou ld presume that would indicate that there would be somewhe re in the area of $5 milli on to $8 mil lion in additional payments for Manitoba. That ta ble would be changed some what then beca use the indexing nu mbers wi ll have changed. All of those minus num bers wi ll be less and the plus num bers on that ta ble wi ll be more.

I don't have the specific percentage increase that we would be looking at for tho se tax filers who are sub ject to the surcharge, thou gh. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Chairman, would the Minister undert ake to provide me su bseque ntly with informa tion concerning the imp act that partial de-indexation wi ll have upon provincial reve nues, as wel l as perhaps recalcu late that ta ble to show what the im pact of de indexation wi ll be on in come taxes paid, especi ally whe n comb ined with the surtax? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Chairman. We wi ll prepare that and have it sent to the mem ber. MR.

CHAIRMA N: The Mem ber for Morris. MR . C. MAN NESS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to ask the Minister one qu estion dealing with individ ual income tax. I think he made the assertion that in fact he wou ld ex pect that particu lar area of reven ue to remain, at least hopefu ll y, at the level predicted.

I'm wondering if in fact he's pretty confident in that state ment bearing in mind that a large proportion, and I can't qu antify that amou nt, but I would feel a large proportion of indiv idual income tax is still made up of business people, far mers, people that are unincorpo- rated and other business concerns who also are, no doub t, suffering thr ough the se times. Again, I would like to share his confidence in the fact that the nu mber wi ll be ab le to hold. I am again wondering if he's taking that into consideration. HO N. V. SCHROEDER: No. In fact, I hadn't really thought about it very much.

I was looking more in terms of the em ployme nt figures. I had indicated pre vi ously that there are about 460,000 people working; there are another 40,000 or so who are in the work force who have not got emplo yment in the province. That num ber of 460,000 is fair ly clo se to the nu mber that was em ployed at the same time last year.

I would say, though, that when you get to unincor porated businesses and farmers in the provin ce - and I don't have any statistical background on that - but certain ly in terms of farmers, it's my belief and I could be wrong, but it's my belief that there is not a great deal of in come tax reven ue that is generated. Cer tain ly the unincorporated business person may well be in a somewh at different position in some years. MR. C.

MANN ESS: I don't know if the Minister is try ing to say that farmers don't pay taxes, or what; we' ll let that one lie at this time. 3652 I'd like to pursue some of the line of qu estioning that in fact my col league did from Turtle Mou ntain.

Sup pose - and I'm not trying to get into a long-winded debate in any sense - but I su ppose there is little concern and list ening to the First Minister th is morn ing , I caught part of the press conference on the radio co ming in, where he seemed to make no refe rence whatsoever to the massive deficit that was announced last night an d, of course, if you put it into perspective thr ough the United States - it see med like many peo ple wanted to do here ju st a coupl e of months ago - when you look at 20 bi ll ion deficit versus 78 billio n expenditure in this coun try, and in the United States I believe it's 100 bil lion plus deficit for 800 billio n spend ing.

The n I don't hear any real mention, first of all, again by our First Minister in the press conference today and again in the qu estion period today, and realizing full well that this isn't Ottawa's debt - I mean it' s all of our debt - I'm wondering if one of the consid erations that you wi ll be taking, or this government wi ll be taking, to this conference to morrow is a con sideration or a req uest of the Federal Government that in fact they consider red ucing the ir spending for the 1982 year, what's left of it. Is that one of the alte rna tives that you will take with you? MR . DEP UTY CHAIRMAN, J.

Storie: The Honoura ble Minister. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Wel l, Mr. Chairman, as I indi cated earlier, it's my view that they are already doing that, in that the Bu dget they announced last night puts them in a position where the y are col lecting, over the two-year period, an additional $3 bil lion in taxes and spending on ly 2.3 bil lion more at a ti me whe n the y're pretending that what the y have is a stimu lative bud get.

The num bers, the $20 billion, are not num bers that should surprise mem bers; that is, those are num bers that certain ly have been out there in the press for some time, maybe not the exact numb er. Al thou gh I

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 was told last night that some financial analy sts were predicting that was where we were heading wit hout any ch ange in the Budge t. Certainly, 17 mil lion to 19 million had frequently been seen in the Gl obe and Mail and other papers. So it didn't come as any kind of a surprise. Now, in terms of cutt ing expenses, I suppose that depends on which expenses. I think that some debts are different from others and sometimes it's more imp ortant to spend than at other times.

I believe that here in Manitoba, for instance, although we have a sign ificant per capita debt as comp ared to some other provinces, we have also been able to obtain signif i cant capital assets in return. I believe not one of the 57 memb ers in this hous e would even consider trading one of our assets - Hydro - for the whole debt; guar an teed, direct, indi rect, etc .. of the province. Just that one asset of our s is worth far more than our total debt. Now I don't know the exact federal structure in terms of how well they have invested their money over the years.

It may well be that a lot of it was for roses, rather than bread. But it wou ld seem to me that I wou ld be very un easy about going to Ottawa and sayi ng, cut your spending, when I have alr eady seen them maybe nail us for a portion of $45 mil lion on that Native Economic Deve lopm ent Fund somehow. I jus t don't und ersta nd their priorities, qui te frankly, when it comes to that issue.

Memb ers opposite know full well - and I needn't tell them ab out the various activities that are happening in Northern Mani toba as a result of those agreemen ts that were carried on by them in their term in govern ment before that and now in our term - whe n those items are in danger, in order th at we can provide some of the floss that they're ta lking about in terms of, say, not taxing that portion of inter est income which is inflatio n, for ins tance.

If you take the money out of the North in order that you can create that tax expenditure here in the south, I think there's something wrong with our priorities. I would be leery about going to Ottawa and saying, cut your spendi ng, beca use I'm not sure where their next cut wo uld come. I don' t see cuts here on their pro posed spending that would affect other parts of the cou ntry in the same way that they're going to affect the West.

The one area where one would have hoped, as a Manitoban, to see some cuts is on the price of energy and there they were silent, beca use I presume if the y wou ld have not gone ahe ad with those ener gy price incr eases, they along with the oil com panies in Alb erta and Saskatchewan would have suffered a decrease in their expected reve nue. That failur e by them wi ll cost us. MR. C. MANNE SS: Wel l, I un derstand what the Minis ter is saying and of cou rse any spending, we would n't want it to im pact negatively on Mani toba.

I gue ss the only co mm ent I have in this area is maybe we should jump the gun and if we can see where a cut of govern ment spending in Ottawa is going to be one of the altern atives, maybe we should be atte mpting to point out to them wh ere they best cut, so maybe it will im pact the least upon us. As far as the co mme nt you made about Hydro, of cou rse we all sup port that in theory; although one can be asset rich and depending on you r payoff

schedule and if you can't meet those payments, it's not worth much. As I have said before, 1990 is our years of crun ch and hopefully we 'll be in position in those years to meet those expenditures. I wou ld like to pursue again -(I nterjection)- Mr. Cha irman, could you gain some comp osur e in this House, please? MR. CHAIRMAN: I would ask honour able memb ers to give the honou rable memb er the respect of listen ing to the question. MR. C. MANNES S: Thank you .

I would like again to ask a ques tion ab out interest rates, beca use it seems to me that the Minister and the mem bers opposite really feel that if inte rest rates drop, that this wi ll be the answer to all of our prayers. Someone made !he com ment last nig ht and it's reall y struck me and I would like to relate it to you. Maybe you could give us you r impr ession on it; but someone made the co mment that during the Depression - and I hate to use tha t word, but I forget what the definition of a depression is; I think it's a series of ne gative growth, and we've had thr ee of them.

I don' t know how many you have consecutively before you have that definition - but that in fact during the Dep ression the interest rate of cou rse was 1 percent -(In ter jection)- That's right, there was 1 percent. So, in effect, there was no - (I nterjection)- Maybe the Mem ber for Thomp son wi ll let me comple te my the sis and if he wants to join in after, he's wel come to do so. The com ment made was that in fact 1 percent inte rest rates were no guarantee whatsoever because 3 percent or 4 percent below that, beca use you had deflat ion, where was your rate of infl ation in a ne gative sense?

So I am wond ering and I ask the question, in light of that exper ience which we were told to forget, some thing that could never reocc ur again, whether in fact this government and people that really believe that inte rest rates in them selves are the sol ution, whether the y really believe that an auto matic drop in those rates wi ll in fact be our salvat ion? HON. I/. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, put in those terms, I have no dou bt that if we were back at 11 percent interest rates, that we wou ld be back havi ng this country moving ahead very strongly again.

We would still have problems; we would still have the proble m with our mining sector, which it's not interest rates there. It's not in flation there that is causing the problem; it's not wages ther e that is causing the prob lem. The problem there is that there is no international market right now and where we are dealing on the international market, we would still have problems. We would sti ll have problems in the lumb er indus try; we would still have problems in those areas where we are exporting certain com modities; but certai nly we would be moving along in terms of cons um er spend ing.

Ther e is a lot of money that's sitti ng in the back there wait ing to be spent once people feel they would be better off spending it than receivi ng the inte rest that they're receivi ng. 3653 MR. C. MANN ESS: Thank you, Mr. Cha irman. I would like to ask one more que stion of a gen eral nature, al most a hypoth etical nature. Then I'll move on to

29 June, 1982 spec ifica lly the Estim ates of Det aile d Reven ue. If we realize it - in fact, our reven ues are going to fall sign ifi cantly shor t of wha t we have her e - can you see our govern men t being prepared to face and make hard decisions and reduce spending? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Ch airman. Ther e is no doub t that we are currently revie wing the situation in the prov in ce and if there are any areas that can be cut without doing more damage to the eco nomy than not cut ting them, then certainly we're looking at them.

If the memb er has any sugg estions for areas to elimi nate, maybe he could gi ve us a li st of his priori tie s. We all have our own priorities. In time s such as these, I don' t think tho ugh that the solution is to go back to a balanced Bud get. I kno w he didn't say th at; he didn 't say a balanced Budge t; but it's pretty di fficul t, whil e everybody else is pulling out, to have govern ment move out too. It jus t adds to the imp etus toward going down hill. MR . C.

MAN NESS: Of cou rse, some people say that's part of our problem, because gov ernme nt represents 45 percent of the activity and they are the ones in fact that haven't been pulling back, but have been continu ing to spend, that we're in the situation we are. I would lik e to ask a qu estion specific then to the retail sales tax es tima ted revenue of some $292 mil lion. Ob viou sly, this is something that we can track more closely. Wha t is the present state of sales within the provi nce, and do we feel confident in sti ll using that figur e at this partic ular time? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr.

Ch airman, to the end of the last month, tha t is, to the end of May, we are on target. Th ere is no ind ication tha t we're going below, so tha t appears to be a positive sign. Just one other comme nt, in terms of govern ment, it is true that gov ernment in one form or another is sp ending about what the memb er is qu oting - 45 percent of the national in come. I don't know whe ther tha t's exactly the correct numb er, but let's assume that's correct. Th ere are also many other areas wher e the govern ment is in volved and how often it will be calle d on in the next li ttle whi le, I don't know.

I was recently at a · conference wher e a federal representative in formed us that the Federal Govern men t has in the vici ni ty of $300 billion in loan gu arantees and con tin gen t li abili ties out ther e in su pport of our economy. Now, some of them, I don't think ther e is any doub t, will never be cal le d in. That is, the CMHC insur ance on housing mortgages, at least a lot of them, even if they are called in, there will be at least some val ue in them: so it's certainly not a total loss but there are others.

You know, ju st the other day, ther e was ano ther $10 0 milli on to Dome; I belie ve ther e is someth ing to Mas sey. Ther e are so many corporations out there that have these liabil ities to gove rnme nt and, of cou rse, we have some of them as well hanging out there. We have CCIL tha t I can think of ju st offhand, and th ere are loans to the cred it un ion movement.

Th ere are other conti ng ent liabili ties for the gove rnme nt of the pro vinc e, not in the kind of magnitude that the Federal Govern me nt has, but th ey're pretty huge and make spend ing planning very very diffi cult because you don't kn ow when some body's going to come in with some bad news. When they come, th ey'll probabl y come at a time when you don't have any money, and it's a problem. MR. DE PUTY CHAIRMAN: The Memb er for Morris. MR . C.

MANN ESS: Possibly the Mi nis ter - maybe we asked him this some time in the last couple of weeks and maybe he has fu rnished the answer al ready - but wha t is the total of loan guar antees offered by this provinc e? It was a que stion I think we mean t to ask and maybe we have, and if he has it at his fi ngertips, maybe he can gi ve it to us? While we're waiting for tha t answer, I'll pose another qu estion. If I could ask the Min ister to move to page 2, under the Attorney -Ge neral's hea ding, (

d) Fi nes and Costs, I see ther e is a dec rease in the revenue expected in that area, and I'm ju st a slight bit cur ious as to the reason for tha t. Is our society beha ving more so these days, or what would be the reason for that? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, I suppose we have more New Demo cratics and I belie ve it has some thin g to do with the Fine Option Program. Ther e is a $200,000 dec rease from la st year, and I would presu me that has someth ing to do -(I nterjec tion)- ther e's $1 70,000 - no, it's not the Fine Option Progr am.

In fact, wha t it is, is that this Estima te will more accu rately reflect act ual revenues received in 1981-82; that is, the Estima te for last year was high. MR. C. MANN ESS: Wel l, it's not tha t im portant so I won't take time to dige st it. One final que stion and it's to do wi th an entry on page 6 un der the Government of Canada . I gu ess the same que stions can apply to (

c) under Acquis itio n/ Construction of Physical Assets, Na tur al Resou rces, or under Con tinuing Programs, Item (

m) Na tur al Resou rces. Either the 1. 8 million or the 1. 7 mil lion and my concern is that, in fact, the way I in terpret them are Agr o-Man projects, and there are monie s that have come from the Federal Gov ernment di rected to spe cific projects. I'm wondering if the Minis ter can tell me what happens to that mone y.

Fir st of all, does it come here automatically, being dir ected to specific funds or specific projects which may or may not be cancel le d by the Provincial Gov ernme nt and if they are, wha t then happens to that fund, or does it only arrive here afterthe Federal Gov ern men t is convinced that in fact the origin al ag ree men t under which they directed the funds to this provin ce has been kept? HO N. V. SCHROEDER: Mr.

Chairman, normally, payment s are made by the Federal Govern me nt after comp letion of a project, so that we spend our mone y and their s and then recover from them, although occa sionally they do send an advance. MR. C. MANN ESS: Is it an advance by project or does it cover a whole wide dearth of projects? HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, the advance would be on projects as opposed to jus t a general advance. MR . DE PUTY CHAIRMAN: Any further qu estions? The Honour abl e Memb er for Fort Garr y. 3654

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 MR. L. SHERM AN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I'd appreciate the oppor tuni ty to ju st discuss one or two crucial points with the Min ister of Fi nanc e at this ju nc tur e relative to the whole su bject of antici pated revenues and, in

part icu lar, the whole su bject of the fiscal and eco nomic crisis that the provin ce faces and that the countr y faces. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the news that we got from the Federal Min ister of Fi nance last night is the fiscal equ ivalent of war.

It 's the fiscal equivalent of an in vasion or an attack by an enemy and I feel - and I'm sur e a gr eat ma ny Canadians feel that it is abso lu tely ur gent that there be some kind of call to fiscal arms addressed to the people of Canada, and that of cour se includ es the people of Man itoba, in order to engage this enemy and overcome it before it over comes us. Central to that, in my view, it is an ur gent req uir ement for a challeng e or an educ ation process and also an ur gent req uir ement for reductions in Fed eral Govern ment spending.

I am a li ttle dis mayed by the apparent adm ission of our Mi ni ster of Fina nce that ther e is no will or in clina tion on the part of the Go v ernm ent of Man itoba at the present time to urge the Federal Gov ernment to reduce federal spending. I can under stand the discomfitur e of any Provincial Gove rnment with that position from at least one pers pective.

The prim ary perspective that encourages a lack of enthusia sm for that position where provinces are concerned is the fact that so much of the provin cial financial operation is dependent upon federal in fusions of capital and federal partici pation, so tha t there's alwa ys the very grave danger that any reduc tion in Federal Govern me nt spend ing of any magni tude will have a serious imp act on a province's econ omy.

In fact, that's a reality of li fe and I can appreciate the Min ister's concern over that; but I think nonethe less tha t th ere ha s to be a ch arge deliv ered to the National Govern ment, the Federal Gov ernment, to red uc e Federal Go vernment spen ding if we're goi ng to su rvive this thing.

I think that there are areas in which the govern ment could reduce its spending, perhaps not on the magnitud e that is necessary for the mome nt, but the psycholo gy of pru dent fiscal man agement has a way of growing and developing and even a modest start could lead to some better man agement practices in the next crucial th ree to five years. When our Min ister of Finance says that there rea lly aren't any obvious areas in which he'd be prepared to sug gest to the Federal Gov ernm ent that it reduce spen ding, I ask him: what about adver tising?

Wha t about the whole area of Federal Gov ernment advertis ing and promotion and self- adu lation for its own posi tions and programs? I ask him, what about programs lik e metrifica tion, forget ting the phi losophical argu ment as to whe ther one is on the side of metrification or opposed to metrification. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Mr. Chairman, I jus t thought I would mention to the memb er - l recog ni ze that he doesn't have the bac kground papers.

He may not be aware of it, but the Federal Government is, in fact, reducing adver tising expen ditu res; in its backgrou nd papers, it's ind icati ng a $30-m illi on cut if there are cuts that I haven't referred to. Now, I don't know what their total adver tising package is, but the member is certainly right; that's an area where they could be cut ting. MR . L. SHER MAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am aware of that, but there are additional pressures that have to be exerted and I think leaders hip mu st come from the provinces to im press these poi nts upon the Federal Gov ernm ent.

Programs like metrification, for exa mple , regardless of whether one is phi losophically for it or agai nst it, this is not the time to be pressing ahead with expensive social chang es, expensive social experime nts, or eco nomic experi ments. What about forei gn aid? I don' t think there is anybody in this House who, gi ven a reasonably healthy economy, would di spute the val ue, the mer it and the efficacy of as big a partici pation by Canada in terms of foreign aid as would be reason able, but these are not times of healthy eco nomy.

If we're our brother's keeper, we're also our brother's keeper at home and, fi rst and fore most, the keeper of our brother or our sister at home. It 's home that's in trou ble. I thin k frankly, that faced with the battle which we faced, an arg um ent could be made for very serious eval uation for the time being of the Candian Foreign Aid Program, alwa ys carr ying the clear und erstand ing that once we restore some sense of fiscal sanit y and balanc e to our own affairs, that we will restore whatever reductions in foreign aid commi tme nts were necessary at this point in time .

The se are the kinds of things that I think have to be urged on the Federal Govern ment. What about the buying back of the Canadian economy? A laud able goal downstr ea m, but someth in g in to which we were rushed without sensible forethought; without consid eration for the devast ati ng economic imp act that it's had upon us. Even al lowi ng for the fact tha t some concessions and some consi derations in tha t area were contai ned in Mr.

MacEachen' s state ment last nigh t, there sti ll does not seem to me to be a clear recognition of the difference between philo sophical or ideological approaches and eco nomic necessities. The whole thr ust to buy back the Canadian economy is essen tially a phi losophical and ideological one, which does not take in to account economic difficul ties. That's a very large part of the problem that we're facing at the present time. The desperate rush to buy back the Canadian eco nomy overnigh t in effect con tribu ted in very great mea sur e to the di fficu ltie s that we are in today. So, when Mr.

MacEachen ack nowledge s as he did in hi s statement last ni ght, that ther e is going to be perhaps some easi ng up of tha t thrus t and that init ia tive, I would like the Prov incial Government of Mani toba and the other provinces to say show us on paper; what do you mean? How are we going to red uc e and modi fy this th rust and pressure? We want ta ngible evidence tha t the first and top priority is to restore the health and vigou r of the economic circu mstanc es of Canadians and the n we can sit down and lo ok about a lo ng-range plan over 20 or 30 or even 50 years to buy back the Canadian eco nomy.

But let's stop trying to do it ove rnight and bankrupting our people in the process. 3655 So, I would like to have some assurance from the Mini ster that he and his colleag ues will be going in to that mee ting with that kind of a sense of urgenc y and dir ecti ng it or arti culating it with all the vigour that

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 they can command to the Federal Minis ter of Fi nance and the Prime Min ister. If the Governm ent of Canada is going to conti nue to spend money on adver tising, shou ldn't it be spent on adver tising tha t's designed to tell the Canadian peo ple the truth about the financial crisis tha t we're in. and we real ly haven't been told tha t truth. Shoul dn 't that adver tising be desi gn ed. hope fully to in spir e Canadians to tack le this thing the same way that we would tackle a war? That hasn't been done yet.

The re seems to be some assump tion tha t Canadians will not respond and tigh ten their belts and buckle down and meet this challen ge. In fact, some of the com ments on hot-lin e sl1ows thi s mornin g ind icated that Canad ians are not going to stand still for wage controls or limi ta tions based at the 6 percent level or the 5 percent leve l. If they're not going to take it, why should they be asked to do it? I think that is a very destructive approach or attitude for any commen tator to take. I think com mentators should be sayi ng to all of us, to our fellow Canadians, we've got to do it.

It has to be done because we are repel lin g an in vasion, a fiscal inva sion, that's in dange r of destroying the countr y. So I say that any Federal Govern ment adver tising that's done in the next few months from here on in. in the next year or two, should be dir ected to inspiring Canadians to the absol ut e necessity of doing that, of pull ing toge ther and of fighting that battle. Why do we ju st admi t defeat before we start? Why is there some assump tion tha t Canadians won't do it? Has anybody ever tested the will of Canadians, the dete rmi nation of Canadians to figh t and win a war lik e this? Mr.

Chairman, I jus t wanted to offer those few though ts to the Min ister of Fi nance preparatory to the very imp ortant conference in to which he and his col leag ues are headed and to ass ure him that it's my opinion that if called upon to fight this battle, Canadi ans will fight it. For the Federal Government to start from the prem ise that they won't fight it and ther efore to refuse to tell them the blackest part of the news. and the bla ckest part of the news is that the countr y is in danger, is admi tt ing defeat before you ever even start.

I think if some leader ship is shown from the provin cial end perhaps we can galvan ize a rudder less Fed eral Go vernment tha t has been adrif t and has had this countr y adrift for a decade in to at least determ inin g some kind of sensible cour se and summ oning up suf ficien t ch aracter and spi rit to pursue that cour se. The leaders hip is going to have to come from here and I urge my frien d. the Min ister of Fi nance, to be in the forefront of that. HON. V.

SCHROEDER: I think the memb er ma kes some valid point s with respect to areas wh ere the Federal Gov ernmen t can get more in volved in terms of reducing expenses. The one area of advert ising, as I said before. I don't know what that $30-mi llion decrease will do in terms of the total adver tising pack age the y had in pla ce in the fir st pla ce. It may well be that th ere could be qu ite a bit more of a cutback tha t's avai lable. There is al ready in the background papers a $17 5- mill ion decrease in foreign aid. I have some di ffi cu lty with tha t.

I think that program and the Native Eco nomic Dev elopment Program especially, are areas that, I bel ieve. in addition to Canadians wanti ng to win th e war on in flation, Canadians are in gen eral not prepared to cut back in those areas. I'm concerned about some pe ople su gges ting that now is the time we elimina te our program to buy bac k Canada, the FIRA Progr am, the Ene rgy Progr am.

I think that if we scrapped FIRA as some have sug gested. what we would be doing is lea ving ou rselves open to have cash-rich corporations. if there are any in the Western World, raid ing some of our more suc cessful companie s whose stock prices are now at very depressed levels. We will pay for that in the long run; I would be concerned about that. I agree that in the shor t term it wo uld be probably bene ficial, but I think in the long run it would be destructive to us so that I would have some concern in that area.

The memb er noted that when we urged the Federal Go vernment to reduce spending that freq uently the Federal Govern men t then does it on the backs of the provinces. Tha t's exactly what they had done this year in savi ng bill ions of dollars in transfer payments that they would otherwise have paid to the provi nc es. They've turned around and found other programs to spend the money on. They cert ainly didn 't then turn around and decrease spending; in fact. in some areas there appear to be dup l ications of services buil ding up that we are looking at.

We've had some new offices open ing up in this city in the last six months. the Department of Supply and Servic es providing some services that may well dup li cate provin cial services and we're look ing at that. If we feel that that service is one that is doing the job that we were origin ally doing, we're not afraid to move out of the field and let people know that there is now a new em ployer in tha t field. So we agree that any kind of waste ful spend ing shou ld be cut.

The memb er has made some specific suggestions that are val id in terms of where to look for it and any fur ther sug ges tions would be helpful. QUESTI ON put, MOTION carried. SUPPLY - CAPITAL SUPPLY Bill NO. 44 - THE LOAN ACT, 1982(2) 3656 MR. DEP UTY CHAIRMAN: Con tinuing with Capital Supply, BE IT RE SOLVED that towards making good certain sums of money for Capital purposes. the sum of $304.4 31 ,0 00 be granted out of the Consolid ated Fu nd. MOTION presented and carried. SUPPLY-SUPPLEMEN TARY SUPPLY Bill NO. 49 - THE SUPPLEM ENTARY APPROPRIATION ACT. 1982 MR.

DEP UTY CHAIRMAN: Conti nuing with Sup ple mentary Supp ly, BE IT RE SOLVED tha t towards mak in g good certai n further sums of mone y granted to Her Majesty for the public service of the provin ce for the fiscal year ending the 31 st day of March, 1983, the sum of $46.042.700 be granted out of the Consoli dated Fund. Is it the will of the comm ittee to adopt the motion?

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 The Hono urable Memb er for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Chairman, I don' t in tend to delay the work of the Com mittee on this subject, but I want to register the vigo rous objec tion onc e agai n to the Supple mentary appropria tion requested for Work Activity Projects un der the Com muni ty Services and Corr ec tions Department. We don't bel ieve that $91 0,400 request is either jus tified or jus tifiable in the wake of some of the un ha ppiness and disma y that we have had and exp ressed with the Min ister's handling of the Work Activity Projects spectru m.

So I wish to record that at this point, Mr. Chairman, as we proceed through the final stage of this appropriation. MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 59 - THE SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION ACT, 1982(2) MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Con tinuing with Sup ple mentary Estima tes, No. 2: BE IT RE SOLVED that towards making good fu rther sums of money gr anted to Her Majesty for the pu blic service of the provinc e for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1983, the sum of $9 mil lion be granted out of the Consolid ated Fu nd. Is it the will of the comm ittee to adopt the motion? MOTION presented and carried. MR.

CHAIRMAN: That conclu des the busi ness of the Comm ittee of Ways and Means. I am lea ving the Chair to return to the call of the House. Call in the Speaker. The Chairman repor ted upon the Comm ittee's deli berations to Mr. Speaker and requested leave to sit agai n. IN SESSION MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Memb er for Flin Flon. MR . J. STORIE: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honou rable Memb er for Wolseley, that the report of the Comm ittee be received. MOTION presented and carried. INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. SPEAKE R: The Honour able Min ister of Fi nance. HO N. V.

SCHROEDER in troduc ed Bill s No. 44, The Loan Act, 1982(2); Bill No. 48, The Appropriation Act, 1982; Bill No. 49, The Su pplemen tary Appropriation Act, 1982; Bill No. 59, The Supple mentary Appropria tion Act, 1982(2). SECOND READING - GOVERNMENT BILLS BILL NO. 44 - THE LOAN ACT, 1982(2) MR. SPE AKER: The Honourable Min ister of Fina nce. HON. V. SCHROEDER presented Bill No. 44, The Loan Act, 1982(2) , for second reading. MOTI ON presented. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Memb er for Tur tle Moun tain. MR. B. RANSOM: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Memb er for Fort Ga rry, that debate be adjour ned.

MOTION presented and carried. BILL NO. 48 - THE APPROPRIATION ACT, 1982 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Fina nce. HON. V. SCHROEDER presented Bill No. 48, The Appropriation Act, 1982, for second reading. MOTION presented. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honour able Memb er for Arthur. MR. J. DOWNEY: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Memb er for Tur tle Mountain, that debate be adjour ned. MOTI ON presented and carried. BILL NO. 49 - THE SUPPLEMENT ARY APPROPRIATION ACT, 1982 MR. SPEA KER: The Honour able Min ister of Fin ance. HON. V.

SCHROEDER presented Bill No. 59, The Suppleme ntary Appropriation Act, 1982, for second reading. MOTION presented. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker , I move, seco nded by the Honour able Member for Tur tle Moun tain, that debate be adjour ned. 3657 MOTION presented and c.mied. BILL NO. 59 - THE SUPPLEMENT ARY APPROPRIATION ACT, 1982(2) MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Min ister of Finan ce. HO N. V. SCHROEDER presented Bill No. 59, The Suppleme ntary Appropriation Act, 1982(2), for second readi ng. MOTION presented. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Memb er for Tu xedo. MR.

G. FILMON: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by

Tuesday, 29 June, 1982 the Honour able Memb er for Virden, that deba te be adjou rned on the bill. MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Attorney-G eneral. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE HO N. R. PENNER: Mr.

Speaker, by leave, I move, seconded by the Mini ster of Fi nanc e tha t Rule 11 5(1) of the Ru les, Orders and Forms of Proce edings be suspende d with respect to notice of the Comm ittee on Private Bills and that the Com mittee on Private Bill s meet today at 3: 15 p.m. in Ro om 255; and fu rther, that the Speed- Up Res olution be suspended with respect to the tim e req uir ed between the report of the Stand ing Comm ittee and the consi derat ion of bill s reported and that this Hous e consider the bills reported from the Stan ding Comm ittee on Law Amendm ents, Mu ni cipal Affa irs, and Pr ivate Bill s at the 8:00 p.m. sitting today.

MOTION presented and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The time bei ng 12:30, the House is adjourned and will stand adjourne d un til 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. 3658

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	32-1-86a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	32nd 1st hansardpdf 86a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d8def02010d6d90cf009bc4b6c3f4e972c646a0e

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