LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 17 June, 1986. Time - 2:00 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER , Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Commi ttees . . . Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports . . . Notices of Motion . . . In troduction of Bills .. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before we proceed to Oral Questions, may I direction the attention of honourable members to the gallery where we have 45 students from Grade 9 from the Wes tgate Mennon ite Col legiate.

The students are under the direction of Mr . J. Pankratz, Mr. Bachme ier and Mr. Wiens, and under the direction of Miss Wiebe. The school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Wo lseley. We have 60 students from Grade 9 from the Lockport Junior High School. The students are under the direction of Mrs. Rachael Elinger . The school is located in the constituency of the Honourable First Minister. We have 17 students from Grade 9 from the Birch River School. The students are under the direction of Mr.

Bruce Johnston, and the school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Swan River. On behalf of all the members, I would like to welcome you all to the Legislature this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS Canadian Indemnity Company - relocation MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Madam Speak er. My question is for the Premier.

I understand that he has been informed today of the decision of the Canadian Indem nity Company to mo ve its head office functions from Winnipeg to To ronto, and given that this is a company that has operated for 91 years in Winnipeg and that this decision will result in 19 people being offered relocation in To ronto and another 41 empl oyees being terminated, has the Premier instr ucted his Minister of Economic Security and Employment Services to become invo lved in assisting and retraining and redeploying these people to find new employment in Manitoba? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I met with the representatives of Canadian Indemnity this morning at approx imately 11 o'clock in which they advised of the intention to move the head office as a result of a merger 955 that had taken place with Dominion. They also indicated at the same time that they were putting together a package that would provide for assistance insofar as those employees who would be adversely affected , Madam Speak er, in respect to the changes that would take place.

Ma dam Speaker, of course the province will be prepared to look into any and all means in a way by which we can facilitate the loss of emplo yment, employment problems within training, etc. The existing programs of govern ment, once requested by the company or once the company is ready as a result of the comple tion of their putting together their package, to ask for cooperat ion. MR. G.

FI LMON: Madam Speaker, given that this is the third insurance company to move its head office from Winnipeg during the term of this government, this government's administration, I wonder if the Premier has initiated or wou ld he initiate studies by his government to look into the taxation and other policies under Manitoba's administration to see whether we can stop the outflow of jobs to other jur isdictions as a result of head offices being moved. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I'm not going to engage in the kind of stunts that the Leader of the Opposition might wish to engage in because I could refer to Swift and the Winnipeg Tri bune and ask why there weren't inquir ies under taken then. The president of the Canadian Indemnity Co. advised me this morning by way of a letter tha t in no way should this action be construed as a negative comment upon the Manitoba business environment. We intend to remain very active in the province. Our motivation is based solely on corporate deci sions which seek to protect the company's position in the - (I nterjection) - market.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable the First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, the president did indicate that the action was a result of a merger which took place when Dominion acquired the assets of Canadian Indemnity which brought about the need for rationalization of the company's operations in To ronto because of the acquisition of Canadian Indemnity by the larger Dominion company holdings. MR. G.

FIL MON: Madam Speaker, I accept what the Premier is saying as being perhaps a sincere intent on the part of the president of the company , but this the third insurance company to move its head office. MADAM SPEAKER: Does the Honourable Leader of the Opposition have a question? MR. G. FILMON: Yes, Madam Speaker. My question to the Premier is: would he undertake studies to try

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 and ensure that we understa nd what effect the taxation and other policies of his government have on the people of Manitoba so that in future the rationalization will take place . . . ? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please , order please . A question should not repeat in substance a question that's already been answered or to which an answer has been refused . The Honourable Leader of the Opposition . MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker , my question to the Premier is: will he find out why such rationalizations don 't take place in Winnipeg 's favour so that companies centralize their operations in Winnipeg in future? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speake r, it would be, I think , very important without a study. Madam Speaker , we kno w that the total capital investment in the Prov ince of Mani toba grew by 12.3 percent during the perio d 1982-1986, five times the Canadian average, Madam Speaker .

We also know that in 1986 the projected capital investment in the Province of Manitoba will grow by 8.9 percent, which is twice the projec ted rate for Canada as a whole . Madam Speaker, there is growth, private capital -wise, in the Province of Manitoba. It is based upon actual, cold figures, and not political rhetoric from Conservative politicians , Madam Speaker . MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker , I wonder if the Premier , then, would be willing to explain to the 41 people who are losing their jobs how great it is in Manitoba. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, I regret that the Leader of the Opposition would like to reflect adversely upon the word of the president of Indemnity . MR. G. FILMON: I'm not . .. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, if we moved from the kindergarten session across the way into the real politics of this Legislature, I would complete my response.

Madam Speaker, as I indicated, it's unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition reflects upon a statement by President Waugh to the effect that the decision in no way related to the business environment in the Province of Manitoba, but was entirely - (Interjection) - The Member for Arthur has asked me do I swallow that? I accept the word of the president of Canadian Indemnity . If the Member for Arthur does not, I do, Madam Speaker. It relates to the fact that there is a rationalization as a result of the acquisition by Dominion of Canadian Indemnity . Manitoba Hydro - Dominion Bridge contract MR. G.

FILMON: Madam Speaker, my question is for the Acting Minister of Energy and Mines, responsible for Manitoba Hydro. There's a news release that has been issued by the Chairman of Manitoba Hydro, Mr. Eliesen, that speaks 956 of an award of a contract to Dominion Bridge for intak e gates at Limestone . My question to the Acting Minister is: what were the prices on the lower bids th at are referred to that were not acceptable under thi s tend er? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of Co­ op Development. HON. J. COWAN: Thank you, Madam Spe ake r.

I believe it is a positive announcement and one which all members of this House should support in resp ect to the awarding of that contract that will mean improved business for that particular comp any. It will mean improved economic circumstances for the economy as a whole and, of course , will mean improved circumstances for the workers and the employees of that company .

I think it show s very well that our policies in respect to the constru ction of Lime stone through Manit oba Hydro are worki ng to the benefit of Man itoba, are providing the typ es of bene fits that we'd all like to see for work ers, employee s, families and companies , and in fact are achieving the goals which I know, if not members of the Opposition share, all Manitob ans share in that regard . In respect to his specific quest ion, I wou ld like to take that as notice, not having the information availabl e to me, only knowing that this announcement is one that is very positive .

MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please . I remind honourable members that answers to questions should be brief, deal with the matters raised, and should not provoke debate. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, I need no lecture from the Minister about employment in Manitoba. That was what my first question was about - the 41 jobs that are being lost.

My question to the Minister , in addition to the knowledge of what prices were bid by the lower bids that were not accepted is: were there any North American bids that were lower than the one that was accept ed on behalf of Dominion Bridge? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co­ operative Development. HON. J. COWAN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Well, again, I need no lecture from the Leader of the Opposition as to how he always tends to dwell on the negative and job loss, and when we have jobs that are being gained in this province because of policies of this government he wants to ignore it.

AS far as the specific question is concerned , I'd indicated to him that I will take those questions as notice and that information which is normally provided on tenders such as this sort will be provided in due course . MR. G. FILMON: Madam Speaker, the Minister takes a long time to tell us that he doesn't know any answers to any questions . But I have one third one that he can take as notice as well since he doesn't have the answers to any questions. Did they have any experience below

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 the tenders that were rejected ? Did they have any experience in erecting and building gates in other jurisdictions other than North America? HON. J. COWAN: . . . certainly we'll be pleased to provide the type of information that is normally provided about tenders of this sort. I will take that question as notice along with the others and will respond to the Leader of the Opposition in due course. Manitoba Hydro - gag orders on officials MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for Lakeside. MR. H. ENNS: Madam Speaker, a question to the First Minister.

Would the First Minister consider asking the chairman of Ma nitoba Hydro to rescind the recently imposed gag or muzzle order on officials of Manitoba Hydro so that Manitobans in general and the media, not excluded, can ask the kind of questions that we ought to be asking now, particularly where billions of doll ars are invo lved, where the tendering system is being circumvented, and I'm sure many Ma nitobans want to have certain questions asked? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: Madam Speak er, I thought the com mittee hearings that were just comp leted in which there was the fullest of information provided in the com mittee - I may be wrong but I thought that to be the case - so I find mystifying the - (I nterjection) - question posed . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. I would hope that honourable members would be as quiet to hear the answers as they are to hear the question. The Honourable First Mi nister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker , I find it mystifyi ng because my inf orma tion is th at the President of Manitoba Hydro provided - (Int erjection) - the .

MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. HON. H. PAWLEY: . . . fullest of information before the com mittee. MR. H. ENNS : Ma dam Speak er, my specific supple mentary question is the gag order was imposed a few days ago after the public hearings with Manitoba Hydro. I'm simply asking the First Minister whether he will consider asking his chairman of Ma nitoba Hydro to rescind that order so we can ask questions of impor tance at this time? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speak er, I still fail to know what the member is speaking of.

The Minister responds in this Chamber in respect to matters pertaining to Manitoba Hydro - or the Acting Minister - the 957 president of Manitoba Hydro, because there can only be one spokesm an. You can't have 15,000 spokespersons who respond to questions that relate to Manitoba Hydro as well if inquir ies are made. MR. H. ENNS: Madam Speaker, a final - (I nterjection) - supplementary. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Hono urable Member for Lakeside would like to ask a final supplment ary. Could he please have quiet? MR. H. ENNS: Thank you. Madam Speaker, my final supplementary question to the First Minister .

If I ask Bill Morham of the CBC to call the appropr iate officer at Manitoba Hydro about recent cont racts awarded, will he get an answer from the appropr iate official, or will he be told that, no, Mr . Marc Eliesen has said nobody at Hydro can speak about any of these su bject matters? That's the gag order that I'm asking to be rescinded. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, knowing the reputation of Mr . Morham of the CBC, he would know enough to go to the person who is accountable and is responsible.

That is the president of Manitoba Hydro, and not go to someone who he might not obtain accu rate or com plete information from. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Lakeshore Metis Cooperative Ltd.­ interest free loan MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert has the floor . MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Speaker , I have a question for the Minister of Co-op Development. The Co-op Loan and Guar antee Board Report for 1984-85 indicates an interest-free loan of $70,000 was made to the Lakeshore Metis Land Im provement Co­ op Ltd.

Would the Minister indicate whether there are any other interest-free loans given by the board, and whether the Minister approved of this loan in any way, sha pe or form? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Co­ op Development. HON . J. COWAN: There are no other interest-free loans currently given by the Loans and Loans Guarantee Board, but it is a policy which I think can work to the benefit of coopera tives attempting to start out under adverse circumstances. I know the members oppo site want to see new cooperatives develop in this province.

The Lakeshore Metis Cooperative was one tha t is provid ing an example,

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 hopefully , for other cooperat ors who wou ld like to make better use of agricultural land th rough the development of cooperation and coo per ative models. So I, yes, did approve that. That is one that is approved directly by the Minister because of the amount. It's standard practice for the Minister to approve loans over a certain amount.

I did approve that one, and I would give this indication; tha t if there are other coop erative s that come forward that in fact have an innovative approach and require that sort of assistance through interest-free loans or through other financial assistance that we can provide, I would be willing and would most likely do exactly the same thing to ensure that we develop and continue to develop the cooperative movement in this province in the way in which we have over the past couple of years. MR. G.

MERCIER: I would ask the Minister if the payments on this loan are up to date or are in arrears , and whether he would table in the House all audits , financial state ments or monitoring that has been done with respec t to this loan by the department? HON. J. COWAN: I can't indicate at the present time as to the status of the payments, but I would be prepared to table those documents, including the audit , which are normally tabled around loans of this nature and answer specific questions if the members opposite have them, certainly . MR. G.

MERCIER: Madam Speaker , would the Ministe r inform the House whether the president and director of Lakeshore Metis Land Improvement Co-op Ltd. , one Garry Anderson, is the same Garry Anderson who was the NOP candidate in the Ste. Rose election during the last election , and what Mr. Anderson 's salary is? HON. J. COWAN: I'm sorry, I missed the last sentence, which was drowned out by the oohs and aahs of the members opposite. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker , the last part of the question related to the amount of salary Mr. Anderson takes from the co-op. HON. J. COWAN: Yes, in fact, Mr.

Anderson is a membe r of that co-op, as are members of the Opposition members of co-op, as am I a member of several co­ ops, as are many civically-minded individuals, who believe in cooperation, members of co-ops. I believe that they should have the same right to assistance that is provided normally to co-ops that any other individual and cooperator in this society should have. As to whether or not Mr. Anderson is paid a salary by the co-op, I do not know that .

I can certainly find out that information and, again , that information which is normally provided in respect to the affairs of cooperatives in this House will be provided in that instance . But I do not believe that once political affiliations, whether they be Conservative, Liberal, NOP, or otherwise, should be a factor in determining whether they get a loan or assistance or whether or not they don't get a loan or assistance .

I am proud to be able to provide loans to work with the department, to work with the Loans and Loan s 958 Guarantee Board, to ensure that all cooperators , regardless of their political stripe, have an opportunity to promote the cooperative motto in this province in the work towards building a stronger future through cooperation for us all. Lakeshor t Metis Cooperative Ltd.­ Special Audit MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker , a final question to the Minister of Fina nce.

Would the Minister of Finance undertake or request a special audit of all financial activities relat ed to this loan and financial trans actions that have taken place since the granting of this loan by the Lakeshore Melis Land Improvement Co-op Ltd., in this grant of $70,000.00? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance . HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you , Madam Speaker.

I believe that there are normal audits done of the operations of that boa rd, and made with respect to all loans made by that board , and I'm not aware of any concerns being raised by those wh o are doing that audit with respec t to any irregularities. Executive Council - Myers , Tim, appointment of MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you , Madam Spea ker. My question is for the First Minister. Could the First Minister indicate whether the Timothy Myers , who, in 1985, contributed $500 to the New Democratic Party, be the one and the same Timothy 0.

Myers who was recently appointed as media specialist II to the Executive Council with a salary of $41,703.00? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister . HON. H. PAWLEY: Yes, Madam Speaker . MR. D. ORCHARD: Mad am Speaker, a supplementary to the First Minister. Since , according to the Order -in­ Council , Mr. Myers will be replacing Mr. Garth Cramer , and given that last year Mr. Garth Cramer donated $1,273.75, will Mr. Myers' tithing to the par ty be increased to that same figure? MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. That question is not within the administrative competence of the government. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Sorry, Madam Speaker, I didn 't hear your comment. MADAM SPEAKER: I reminded the member that he is to ask questions that are within the administrative competence of the government . Donations to a political

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 party are not within the administrative competence of the government. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker , I, of course , have to abide by your ruling , but matters within the competence of this government . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please . May I remind the honourable member that I am interpreting the Rules of the House, not my rules , your rules , sir. Do you have a question? Executive Council - flow-chart of staffing MR. D. ORCHARD: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker , I wonder if the First Ministe r would be so kind as to provide the House a flo w-chart of the staffi ng that now currently is serving Executive Counci l in his office, including special assistants, executive assistants, media specialists , communication specialists, and alt of the myriad of staff that he has. Would he provide that information to the Hous e? HON. H. PAWLEY: Madam Speaker, during Estimates , and let me assure the honourable member that I wouldn't want a media specialist working for me in what is a political-appointed position that was a contributor to the Conserv ative Party.

Bissett Recreation Site - float planes MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights . MRS . S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Northern Affairs. In 1982, a planning study, and eventually a signed by-law , took place in Bissett indicating a certain area should be des ignated as a recreation site. Would the Minister explain why he has just recently granted permission for float planes to land in this recreation site? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs . HON. H. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, I thank the Member for River Heights for that question.

It appears that there was a firm from Selkirk wanting to use that site as a place to land their planes . There is a need for that classification of aircraft in that area , and there are no plans in place at th is time by the Community of Bissett to develop their recreation site . At this time, there are aircraft landing spots and also a boat landing spot which are utilizing that area. So realty there is a danger to the people who would be utilizing it if it was allowed for a recreational site.

So until such time as the plans are in place for development of a recreational site, then I've authorized the aircraft to use it as a landing site for the aircraft. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: A supplementary to the same Minister. Would the Mini ster please explain why he overruled the council who ruled against allowing float planes, in that they would infringe upon the swimming area and be a hazard for children? HON. H.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker , after rounds of consultations with the community council , there was a difference of opinion within the community, and they came to the Minister for a decision and that's the decision I made, after taking into consideration all the factors. Wild Rice Permits MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson . MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Madam Speake r, to the Minister of Natural Resources.

The constitutionality of several departmental programs has been called into question in the last year, and since it appears that civil servants may be prevented from justifying government policy, would the Minister please inform the House of the rationale for giving Native people priority in the allocation of wild rice permits? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. L.

HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker, those matters are before the courts, the matters that the Member for Emerson refers to, specifically the question of wild rice , and I think it would be inappropriate of me to make reference to that while it is being considered by the courts. 959 Migratory Bird Treaty MR. A. DRIEDGER: I have a new question for the Minister of Natural Resources. A Manitoba Court of Appeal ruling decided that a policy made by Executive Branch of Government , which gives a particular group dispensation from obed ience to laws, is an illegal policy.

The Canadian Native Law Report also clearly states that the Migratory Birds Convention Act of Canada applies to Treaty Indian s. Would the Minister please explain why his departmen t is preparing to discriminate against non-Native offenders of the Migratory Bird Treaty? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker , I am not aware of any attempts on our part to discriminate, but if the member would allow me to take that as notice , I wilt check within the depar tment to see if there is any evidence of that. Natural Resources - suggested senior staff replacement MR. A. DRIEDGER: A quest ion to the same Minister, Madam Speaker.

Given that we have three or four examples in the last year where illegal policies have been developed, would the Minister please look at his senior staff and

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 look at the possibility of maybe replacing some of his staff so that we have proper programs being developed that are not going to be impinging on the rights of Manitobans? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker , I would like to say to the House that I totally reject the premise of the Member for Emerson that the matters are illegal. Those policies are being considered by the courts, and when the courts rule, if there is indication that any member of the departmental staff has been involved in some legal improp riety, I will deal with it at that time.

But I think it is a gross misrepresentation, again by the Member for Emerson, to suggest that departmental staff are dealing with it inco rrectly . MR. A. DRIEDGER: I would like to ask the same Min ister then if he would consider and check some of the memos that have been passing from his directorate to the regional managers regarding these kinds of things? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Spea ker, that comment is so vague that I would have difficu lty, but I would be pleased to check into any matter that he would table. Please do. Please do. I would ask that they be tabled.

Manitoba Indian Affairs - funding cutbacks MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister responsible for Native Affairs. A recent audit . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. MR. S. ASHTON: I believe I have the floor, Madam Speak er. A recent audit of the Manitoba Indian Affairs Branch has unc overed serious cutbacks and underfunding of reserves in Manitoba.

My question to the Min ister of Native Affairs is as to whether he has been in contact with Manitoba Indian Bands and the Federal Government in regard to this very serious matter of funding cuts? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nou rable Min ister responsible for Native Affairs. HON. E. HARPER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have been in touch with a few chie fs, and also I did talk to David Crombie and I mentioned to him about the audit. He mentioned that he is having serious problems in Manitoba in respect to the audit that was done.

This confrontation took place in passing on a different matter, I believe it was on Thursd ay. He indica ted to me, he had a serious problem in respect to the special audit that was conduc ted. I may say that I give credit to the Brotherhood of Indian Nations that have made presentations to the 960 standing comm ittee on Indian Affairs, and it has brought out some light that there were cutbacks made to the Indian programs that were ins tructed by the Minister of Indian Affairs, him self, that there would be no cutbacks of existing programs.

Wh at we have found out is that they were cutbacks at the dir ection of the Minister , hi mself; and also the audit indicated that the facts tha t were presented to Parliament were mislead ing. I think the Min ister of Indian Affairs has a serious problem in terms of the departmental staff or the management of staff that are present ing the facts to that department in Parliament, which is a serious breach. I know I would say that the Minister of Indian Affairs get a handle on his department. MR. S. ASHTON: Just on a brief suppl ementar y, Madam Speaker.

In view of the fact that the Department of Indian Affairs has annou nced its intention of cutting back its staffing by 50 percent and moving that to the . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. A supplementary does not need a pre am ble. Does the hon ourable member have a suppleme ntary? MR. S. ASHTON: Madam Speak er, I would like to ask whether the Mi nister will review the plans of the Indian Affairs Department to cut back its staff and 50 percent transfer to the reserves to ensure that . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order , order please. A question must be within the administrative competence of a Min ister .

Does the hono urable membe r ha ve a suppl ementary? MR. S. ASHTON: Madam Speaker , I have add ressed a question to the Minister responsible for Native Affairs, and this certainly relates to the concerns of Native people and tha t is, to whether they will get the full benefits of the planned tran sfer. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. That question is out of order. The Honourable Member for Brandon West. The Honourable Member for Thompson on a point of order. MR. S. ASHTON: Could I have the opportunity to reph rase the question, please?

MADAM SPEAKER: The honourable member can briefly rephrase a supplementary if it's within order and in the adminis trative com petence of the Minister. MR. S. ASHTO N: Madam Speak er, I'm asking the Min ister of Native Affairs whether he will be in touch with the Federal Mini ster of Indi an Affairs and Manitoban Indian Bands to ensure that they receive the full benefits of the trans fer of Indian Affairs staff to Native Bands in Manitoba. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. That question is a repetition of your original question. A.E.

McKenzie Company Ltd.­ tabling of Annual Report MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West.

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speak er, my question is dir ected to the Acting Minister respo nsible for A.E. McK enzie Company Limited. In view of the fact that on Thur sday the Standing Comm ittee on Economic Development will be considering the An nual Report of A.E. Mc Kenzie Company Limited, when will the annual report be made available to members of this Ho use? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Spea ker. I understand that report will be tabled tomorrow in the House. Payroll tax HON. E.

KOSTYRA: While I'm on my feet, Madam Speaker , I'd like to respond to a question that I took as notice or was taken as notice by my Acting Mi nis ter on May 22, questions from the Member for Morris regarding - the specific question was related to - were there any conditions under which the Minis ter of members of the staff of the Department of Finance have discretion with respect to, as he referred to it, the payroll tax.

The situation is that there is no discretion by the Department of Finance or the Min ister of Finance with respect to exercising any discretion with respect to the health and post-secondary education tax levy.

There was howev er, Madam Speak er, in the 1982 Budget Addr ess the following stat ement: This is a quote from the Budget on Page 102: "The province will also safeguard against the potential negative effects of this levy on businesses experiencing significant financial difficulty by rebating the costs of the levy for all busi nesses eligible for assistance under the Manitoba Interest Rate Relief Program ." That was done under the Inter est Rate Relief Program for those eligible applicants qualifying for a rebate of the actual amount of the levy.

That was done through the respective programs and through the Departments of Agriculture and Business Development and To urism. The member also asked for a list of those companies, and I can table copies of that for the member. Education funding formula MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speak er, I have a new question to be dir ected to the Minister of Education. I would like to take this opportunit y, Madam Speaker , to thank the Minister of Education for meeting with Manitoba's low-cost school divisions this morning. The reports that I've heard are that the Minister gave the representatives there a good hearing.

Madam Speaker, in view of the fact that earlier in this Session the Min ister of Education made the statement that the school divisions are being dealt with fairly - and in particular he singled out the Brandon School Division - and after his meeting this morning with representatives of low-cost school divisions in this 961 province, does the Minister now recognize tha t there is a problem requiring his attention? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I appreciate the thanks for meeting with low-cost school divisions; it isn't necessar y.

I see that as part of my role as Minister , and I'm more than happy to meet with them or any other group who have concerns with respect to educational matters. I should indic ate I hope that the individuals who attended that session of many school divisions from across, particul arly, South western Manitoba were not left with the impression that there is any simple means for redressing concerns that they raised.

Madam Speaker , I hope that I left the representatives of those divisions with the clear understanding that the government support to education programs cannot deal with all of the perceived problems that are out there. The fact of the matter is that an incr ease to one school division, unless we're prepared to grant a much more sign ificant portion of provincial spending to education, means a reduction in other areas. I do recognize tha t there they have a legitimate concern. I indicated that it wasn't going to be easy to address that concern.

That doesn't mean that we aren't obliged to review at any time when a concern is addr essed, and I undertook to take a second look and to review the implications of the support program. I also undertook to review any implications changes would have for other school divisions and I note that, while there were 11 or 12 or 13 school divisions in attendance at the meeting, there were some 45 who were not at the meeting, including special rev enue district divisions who, by and large - (I nterjection) - pardon? I was talking about special districts. Madam Speaker , there are two sides to the issue.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon West with a supplementar y. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speak er, while recog nizing that there is a legitimate concern, the Minister has not gone that one step further to say that he would be . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a supplementary? MR. J. McCRAE: Yes, I do, Madam Speak er, if you'll allow me to put it. MADAM SPEAKER: With no

preamble? MR. J. McCRAE: Will the Minis ter bring in a funding regime that treats all divisions fairly, and that eve ryone understands and can be explained to municipal councils and ratepayers, so that lon g-range planning can be undertaken? HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker , I believe that it is the intention of the government to treat all school divisions in a fair manner. I point out to the member opposite, as I did to those in the meeting, that fair is often in the eyes of the beholder .

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 Dutch Elm Disease Program MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Charleswood. MR. J. ERNST: Thank you, Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Natu ral Resources . With the serious cutbacks in provincial assistance over the last few years, the City of Winnipeg has had to limit its Dutch Elm Disease Control Program. Will the Minister advise the House if they 're going to be providi ng any increased assistance for this very valuable progra m in 1986? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Urba n Affairs . HON. G.

DOER: Madam Speaker , at our last meeti ng with the official del egat ion, the Ministe r of Natu ral Resources and myself agreed to meet with the counc illor responsible and the Mayor . I should say that, in addition to the $350,000 in grants to the City of Winnipeg for Dutch Elm Disease, the province in its capita l grant s to the City of Winnipeg approved a grant of some ove r $250,000 for reforestation. So the answer to your question is, yes, we are increasing the support for the Dutch Elm Disease Program in the area of reforestation as part of our $90 million, six-year capital grant to the City of Winnipeg.

MR. J. ERNST: Madam Speaker, if I may, I think the Minister is mixing apples and oranges . MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J. ERNST: Yes, I do, Madam Speaker . Madam Speaker, as Dutch Elm Disease is manifesting itself in greater numbers of trees that ever before, endangering one of Winnipeg's greatest natural assets MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question, a supplementary with no

preamble? May I remind the honourable member question period is not a time for debate? Does the honourable member have a question? MR. J. ERNST: Yes, Madam Speaker, I do have a question. I was about to ask it as part of that sentence, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Ask it. MR. J. ERNST: Would the Minister advise the House if they have any other plans to stop the spread of this disease in Winnipeg? HON. G. DOER: Madam Speaker, the member opposite asked whether we had improved the level of support for Dutch Elm Disease, and it's not apples and oranges .

On the one hand, we're providing the $350,000 for prevention, and an increase of over $250,000 for refores tation. So when the trees decay, at least there are new trees in there for the City of Winnipeg. In 962 addition to that, Madam Speaker, we have stated that we will meet with the councillor responsible for potential other programs in 1986-87. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The time for Oral Questions has expired. The Honourable Member for Burrows. MR. C.

SANT OS: Before we go to Orders of the Day, I reques t respectfully the leave of the House that we return to the item relating to the presenting of r eports from Stand ing and Special Committee s, so t hat I may present the progress of last night 's Committ ee of Supply. (Agreed ) PRESE NTING R EPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIA L COMMITTEES (Cont'

d) MR. C. SANTO S: Thank you , Mad am Spea ker. The Comm ittee of Supp ly h as conside red certa in resolution s, respectf ully reports pro gress and asks leave to meet again. I move, seconded by the Member fo r Inkster, that the Report of the Comm ittee be rec eived. MOTION presente d a nd carried. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ellice. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh ! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. COMMITTEE CHANGES MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ellice. MR. H. SMITH: I'd just like to announce a change in the Economic Development Committee.

We have the Member for Thompson substituting for the Member for Flin Flan; the Member for Inkster substituting for the Member for Osborne; the Member for Lac du Bonnet substituting for the Member for Dauphin. ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Madam Speaker, first on a matter of ... MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. If the honourable members would like to come to order, we can proceed with Orders of the Day. The Honourable Member for Brandon West , on a point of order? MR. J.

McRAE: I think you'll find that if you feel there's disorder in this House, you may find that the reason for it goes back to something that happened yesterday in this House. We're sharing space in this room ...

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. MR. J. McRAE: Madam Spea ker, would you allow me to make my point? MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a point of order? MR. J. McRAE: I have a point of order. Madam Speaker , you just rose to ask that order be restored to this House. There's a much better chance of order being restored if a member of this House who has maligned every member on this side . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. I have taken that point of order under consideration. We will discuss it at the time I bring it back to the House. We are now on Orders of the Day.

HOUSE BUSINESS MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Go vernment House Leader. HON. J. COWA N: Madam Speak er, on a matter of House business first, it is my understanding that the Economic Development Commi ttee finished its review of CEDF, Moose Lake Loggers, and Channel Area Loggers this morning and on this Thursd ay, will be considering A.E. McKenzie Seeds, the report of. On Tuesday and Thursday next, through agreement with the Opposition House Leader, the commit tee will be considering the report of Flyer, so members of that comm ittee can so note.

Having said that, Madam Speaker , I would move that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a comm ittee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty , Estima tes for Agriculture taking place in the Cham ber; Estima tes for Highw ays and Transportation taking place in the Comm ittee Room, seconded by the Min ister of Municipal Affairs.

MOTION presented and carried and the Hous e resolved itself into a Commi ttee to consider of the Supply to be gr anted to He r Ma jesty with the Honourable Member for Burrows in the Chair for the Department of Agricultur e, and the Honourable Member for Kildonan in the Chair for the Department of High ways and Tran sportation. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY -HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION MR. CHAIRMAN, M. Dolin: Comm ittee, come to order. We are dealing on Page 97, Resolution No. 95, 6. Driver Vehicle and Licensing. The Minister has a statement he'd like to make. The Minister of High ways. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Yes, yesterday when we completed the dis cussions at 10 o'clock, we had just passed the members a summ ary of financial implic ations of the revised agreement with MP IC for cost-sharing, and I 963 think it is relatively self-explanatory. But I did want to correct one impr ession left on the record, that it may have given the impr ession that the Special Warrant for $2,128,200 was passed November 7, 1985. lt was authorized - that Special Warrant - by Cabinet minute, as I stated yesterd ay, November 7, 1985. However, the Special Warrant itself was not passed until February 7, 1986.

I think this is important information for the Member for Pembina who had reflected that this wasn't shown in the quar terly statement at the end of December. lt wouldn't have been, obviously , because it had not been passed until February 7, and it's impo rtant that the member - before he starts chastising the government for misplacing the way it reports information - that he would be aware the implications were not quite the same as he left them on the record yesterd ay, and how I left them on the record, by not correcting the statement as to the exact date of the Special Warrant. So it was February 7, 1986.

I should mention, as well, that discussion of Special Warrants is covered under Public Accounts in detail, and I think the Member for Pembina was aware, and that was also referred to yesterday. We were talking about the matter of whether Special Warrants should be inclu ded in the bud get, and I said fina nce is res ponsible for the structur e, forma t, and so on, but Public Accounts is the appropr iate place to discuss Special Warrants. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Yes, I just have one or two questions left in this department. Last year we questioned the Minister on a newspaper

article - it appeared about the time we were getting into Estimates - about one of his former aides being appointed as adminis trative officer with the Licence Suspension Appeal Board. I guess I can keep that until we get under boards and committees. MR. CHAIRMAN: lt would be more appropriate. MR. D. BLAKE: The next item might be . . . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Thanks for giving notice anyways. MR. D. BLAKE: . . . a little better for that.

Seeing as I brought it up, maybe the Minis ter of Urban Affairs might be here because he stated this thing as a "blatant pol itical appoi ntment," Ma nitoba Go vernment Emplo yees' Association President Gary Doer said . . HON. J. PLOHMAN: He wasn't the Minister then. MR. D. BLAKE: We'll get into that and we'll find out if that gentleman is still around. HON. H. PLOHMAN: I was as annoyed as you were, Dave. MR. CHAIRMAN: 6.(a)(1) - the Member from Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: Yes, what are the criteria for an Autopac per person getting an Autopac agency? I have

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 a small town right now and a fellow who is trying to get ahold of an Autopac agency . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, obviously, that would be dealt with under the Crown corporation MPIC. As far as a driver licensing agent, when MPIC does approve an Autopac person or company as an agent , we, as a matter of course, also issue approval for a driver licensing and registration agency so that person or company will then be able to transact all of the business that is related to insurance and registration licensing and so on. MR. D.

ROCAN: In other words, he would have to come and address the Minister on this , or who would he go talk to to try and get this application through? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, as I indicated . . MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me. I thought that the question would be more approp riately asked under Crown Investments than under Crown corporation MPIC who could give you the details on what the procedures are. The Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: Yes, okay.

I wonder if the Ministe r could tell us the reason why all of a sudden now we've got these cheaper looking licence plates that they're not reflectorized and the red "Friendly Manitoba " is gone , the whole thing is all black now. Are we saving much money here or what? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, I just wanted to complete the information. I, as Minister, do send a letter of appointment for Autopac agents, but I am not involved in the approval process. That is done by MPIC , so that was correct . So there was some involvement, Mr. Chairman ; I just wanted to clarify that.

Insofar as the licence plates , the change was made this year to move from reflectorized licen ce plates to painted licence plates as is the case in a number of major jurisdictions - Ontario, I think , being one of the major ones . It never did shift to the reflectorized licence plate . The saving is $120,000 per year in years where we just have the replacement of plates that are damaged and new plates issued for new vehicles and so on.

If there was a major change, a complete change of the plates, which takes place every 10 years or 7 to 10 years , there would be a substantially greater saving of perhaps upwards of $1 million in the saving of costs of licence plates, but for this year and every year $120,000 is saved. We think that is a legitimate cost­ saving measure by the government. MR. D. ROCAN: Due to the fact that we're saving $120,000 already, and the Minister indicated here the other day that a personalized licence plate will go from $50-75 and we're raising it over and over and you've got a cheaper looking plate .

Are we not getting what we're paying for on this type of deal? If we're paying $50, I would think it's more than appropriate just for this black-looking licence plate instead of this $75 .00. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I don't think there was ever any indication that you would get exactly what you're paying 964 for. Obviously , if you want the privilege of having a personalized licence plate , you have to pay something for that. It's not the actual cost of the licence plate . It actually contributes revenue towards other programs and towards other revenues of government. Last year it was $50 ; it's now going to $75.00.

In Saska tchewan , it's $100.00 . In Alberta it's $150 for personalized licenc e plates. So, you 're not getting it two colours I guess, insofar as your money 's worth, but you are gett ing a personali zed licence plate. I've indicated that it doesn 't cost that much to produce it. It is contributing toward s general revenues. MR. D. ROCAN: Can the Minister tell us how much reven ue is brought in from these personalized licence plates? HON. J. PLOHMAN: There 's about 8,000 of those times $100, this next year, if it stays the same; $75 times 8,000, one time only.

They wouldn't have to get it every year, so it woul d vary from year to year. How many of them are renewed every year - I mean new ones? Eight thousand is an irrelevant figur e. I'm advis ed there 's about 1,200 new applica tions per year at $75 each . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: Well , we can start moving through it . MR. CHAIRMAN: 6 .(a)(1)-pass; 6.(a)(2) - pass ; 6.(bX1) - pass ; 6.(b)(2) - pass; 6.(cX1)-pass; 6.(c)(2) ­ pass ; 6.(d) - pass.

Resolution 95: Resolved that an amount not exceeding $12 ,5 54 ,900 for Highways and Transpor tation , Driver and Vehicle Licens ing, be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March , 1987-pass. We are now on Item 7, Boards and Committees , Page 98, Resolution No. 97. The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: I wonde r if the Minister could just bring us up to date on deregulat ion . There is a White Paper, if he could inform the committee just where that stands at the present time and what position we're in. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr.

Chairman, I'm not sure wheth er the member is referring to int ra-prov incial trucking and revisions that were contained in the White Paper that the province issued last year before the amendm ents were put in place , or whether he's talking abou t the freedom to move that the Federal Government put in and that has major implications on the province as well . MR. D. BLAKE: The provincial position , first of all , and then maybe we can touch on the other. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Well the provincial position for trucking with in the province has been that we should move in a very cautious and responsible way to change the regulatory system that had been in place for intra­ provincial trucking for some 50 years . As a result of that study, the task force that went out and consulted , and then the reports that were tabled, and more

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 consultations, and then a White Paper issued, we passed a number of amendments to The Highway Traffic Act last year. Most of these have been proclaimed, par ticular ly those deal ing with enforcement, fee incr eases, or fines that could be levied by the Transport Board . We are also considering at the present time the enacting of the maximum rate proposal that was put forward in our legislation last year.

That has not, at the present time, been enacted, or proclaimed, I should say, because we want to do further consultations as to exactly how it would take place, as we promised during last year's consultations. But it does provide for maximum rates being set by the board for intra­ provincial trucking and provisions for minimum rates if there's predatory pricing that may be taking place. We also haven 't put in place the owner-operator prov1s1ons pend ing further di scussions and consultations with labour and with the indus try on whether there should be a ratio, or what kind of formula should be in place.

In addition to that, we have proclai med the sections dealing with the farm trucks and making it legal to haul for neighbours for compensat ion, but not at profit, in other words, to help your neighbour out. So that reflected the representations that were made at the hearings last year. I hope that it's a workable solution. We haven 't had an awful lot of complaints in the first year on that. So, in addition to that, the board has under taken a number of changes that were contained in the White Paper revising their rules of procedure to expedite the hearing process.

They have really brought down the backlog there. I guess, because of the uncertainty a bit in the regulatory environment at the present time, not as many are applying, or not as many are intervening in the heari ngs. So the hearings have cleared up quite a bit and they're really very short now - a month to six weeks backlog as opposed to nine months a little over a year ago. There has been a sign ificant benefit there for trucking companies, or prospective trucking companies, trying to get into the busin ess. They do not have to wait as long as they had to previously .

They've also put in place procedures that will enable pre-hearings, or a study of the evidence first, before a hearing is granted, to determine whether a hearing is necessary, and to eliminate frivolous interventions, where this was the case many times in the past; so that seems to be working. We are, as well, one of the first provinces to expand the list of designa ted commodities, which are really deregulated commod ities. There was a rather substantial increase, as of March 15th, I believe it took effect, in the number of commodities that could be transported without having to have PSV authori ty.

So that has, I think, free d-up the system a lot. In addition to that, we're looking at the potential of re gion alizing author ities, so that there's mo re competition in a region. A lot of trucking companies are opposed to it because they see that others will be able to compete with them. lt hasn't been acted on, but it was put out there to get some views and some thinking of, not only the trucking industry itself, but also shippers to get some feed back.

There may be some further progress made on that in the future, but the idea was there that there would be provisions for 965 a number of PSV authorities in an area to compete with each other in servicing the small communities in a region, rather than having to go all the way to Winnipeg with things and then brought out to another community that's only a few miles away. lt's very costly , inefficient and it doesn't make sense. So that is an area that may have to be moved on in the future.

So I think that a number of the changes that the Transport Board has made have really freed -up the system and made it more acce ssible and responsive, without deregulating. We still retain the public need and convenience tests, which involv es proving that it is not in the public interest to allow another trucking firm into the busi ness formally .

That is something that is being proposed to be changed at the federal level, particul arly, with the "freedom to move" proposals, which are really saying that, for extra-provincial trucking, we should go to a shared onus or reverse onus process, where it is up to the intervener to prove, to a certain extent, that it would harm the public interest if that person was grant ed an authorit y. That makes it much different than the person who is applying to have the full onus of proof that it would be in the public interests for him to be indeed serving those commun ities.

So that is a switch in the onus, and that is proposed by the Federal Government to be in place January 1, 1988, for a period of three years. We would like to see that five years and we've made that known, very clearly, because we believe that there should be a transitional period before moving and, if moving, to a fitness test on ly, which is what the Federal Government is thinking about now and which the shipping indus tries definitely want, because they think it's going to lower their costs.

Now we are concerned about the implications on the trucking industry and particularly if those rules are applied, not only for Canadian firms with each other, but also ins ofar as American firms coming into Canada and perhaps taking over a lot of the lucrative runs and perhaps buying up trucking firms here and moving out their headq uarters. And Winnipeg, of course, having 9 of Canada's 15 largest trucking firms, we have a lot at stake in that whole issue.

So we want to move cautiously and we're saying to the Federal Go vernment, give it five years under this reverse onus, still have a hearing process, so you can have some checks and balances into who gets into the trucking busin ess; and during that five year period do an exhaustive analysis of the impact and evaluation, assess and determine who the losers in the system are, ensure that you have your safety code in place, ensure adequa te enforcement, ensure that the Federal Government is paying for some of that enforcement because after all it's their jurisd iction - trucking, transportation - that they'v e delegated to the provinces in trucking.

We are currently paying for the enforcement ourselves. We are introducing this year, as members have seen, the new Comm ercial Vehicle Testing Program for safety reasons so that commercial vehicles will have to be tested for their equipment for each year. We're saying that there has to be a safety code that will also include hours of work legislation, so that driv ers will not be forced to be on the road for hours and hours just to try to make a go of it, especially owner-operators. So with all those things there's a lot of change there and we think that there should be this transitional period

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 of reverse onus for five years; no automatic sunsetting of that provision; have the studies, the evaluations which we are commi tted to doing through CCMT A and then make an assessment as to whether to move to fitness on ly. At the same time, there can be negotiations going on with the U.S. Gov ernment to gain some rec ognition from them, that Manitoba and Canadian truckers may need some protection under this system, a bilateral trade in trucking agreement, which doesn't exist at the present time. We're saying that's necessa ry. There has to be that rec ognition by the Americans.

I think we have a consistent, uniform approach in Manitoba from the trucking indus try, from labour , but we do not have the shipp ers, at least the big shi ppers, coming on side on this. They're anxious to go full tilt and we're saying no, don't fall into the same pitfalls necessarily that the U.S. did. We're not a mere image of the U.S., let's take some time to assess and move slowly but still move forward. That's kind of where it's all at.

I understand now that by June 25 or so, the Federal Government will be tabling, Mazankowski will be tabling the new national Tra nsportation Act revisions in the Federal Parliament. We've had input along the way, consultations, and we want to commend them for that; howe ver , we're still not com pletely satisfied from Manitoba's point of view that there will be enough safeguards built in to those new revisions to ensure that we're protected here in Manitoba.

Alberta, Sask atchewan, and B.C. really have quite a different situation than we do here in Manito ba, although Saskatchewan is coming very closely into the same position we are. But they don't have the amount of presence of trucking headqua rters that we have in Winnipeg, so we have more at stake. MR. D. BLAKE: Well, I'm glad the Mi nister brought up the backlog. That was going to be my next question. Just on a point of interest, are the Americans now levying a charge for Canadian truckers crossing the border? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We understand that charge is to take effect July 6.

The Customs Office recently has notified firms. We've come across a copy of the correspondence. I don't know that we've been sent any dir ectly as a government, but it would indica te that there will be a $5 charge for each trip for anyone entering the U.S., including American carriers. So it is not a discrimina tory tariff, but it will be an additional cost for trucking into the U.S. of $5 per truckload or $10 0 for an annual permit with no limitations.

So that is something that we're assessing right now and determ ining whether there's a reciprocal kind of ch arge assessed by the Federal Government in any way, shape or form at the present time, whether there should be. But that's something that took place without consultation and will incr ease the costs of trucking by $100 per year , and is something that is just dropped on us. MR. D.

BLAKE: On the trucking franchise, one of the things that's affect ing my area and, I'm sure, other areas, the larger trucking firms have moved in in some areas and have just made it so difficult for the smaller 966 local trucker that, after spending $10,000 or $20,000 on lawyers fighting the big boys, so to speak, they've just given up and sold out. The evidence is there already, that the service is not as personalized and as good as it was with the local trucker . We're having meat shipments arrive without the benefit of reefer trucks, 24 hours a truck, not accepting it, meat's going back.

The service is not what it was. So that's something that we have to be very mindful of, I think, when they're granting lic ences or enlarging franchi ses, because the giants don't really worry about the little shopke eper who may be taking a very small quant ity. I wanted to mention too the temporary permits being granted for wide loads or special loads. I' ve talked to the Mi nis ter before on granting permits for wider loads without the necessity of two escort vehicles. That's presenting quite a hardship to one operator in my area, who brings in a bin from the west.

They can travel Saskatchewan and Al berta but, when he hits the Manitoba bord er, he has to have two escort vehicles to come an extra 80 to 100 miles into Manitoba. He's been applying for permits, and they haven't been granted. lt's a 16-foot load and 15 feet is the maximum. HON. J. PLOHMAN: First of all, I just wanted to make a comment on the small rural truckers. That's exactly why we want to retain the right of the province to regulate according to provincial policie s to protect the small and captive shi ppers in the rural areas of the province.

I think that principle has been accepted at the federal level for in tra-provi ncial trucking undertakings. But if we were to move to a fitness only , of course the thing would be thrown wide open, and anybody would be in there. So there's that balanc e, and there's that move to go towards throwing it wide open.

But the whole idea of this regional kind of proposal was to allow for some hub -and-spoke type of delivery services being set up in areas that would be rational ized, make more sense than the current system that we have which, as you say, has resulted in some of the smaller truckers just selling out to the big guys, Gardewine or whatever it might be, just servicing the whole area. So the idea of that regional trucking service or project or proposal was to provide for greater opportunity for those small truckers in the areas, to give them greater access to additional markets.

Insofar as these permits for these wide loads, we had made some special provisions and changes after meeting with a company from - what was it, Winkler? - Altona. They had met with us, and they have some special dollies that they have with a number of additional wheels. I don't know if it's 12 wheels across. Because they then, when they go off the edge of the pavement, there wouldn't be this abrupt movement of this wide load, it was felt that they could get by with one escort vehicle. How ever, in the case of the bins, it was quite a different situation in terms of the equipment they were using.

I looked at that very carefully and wanted to see if we could be a little more lenient there, and I would like to look at it further to see whether there are some other options. But that's why it is maintained, the regulation was maintained that two escort vehicles would be required.

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 We did make it a little looser for the mobile homes, 16-footers, because of the kind of equipment they were using, and it was also cons istent with what Saskatchewan and Alberta, I think, were doing in that area, a special kind of dolly that was available. But people moving those bins had trailers or low beds or high beds, whatever the case may be, that did not have the wheels that were continuous across and, therefore, it would be abrupt movement having to swing out over the pavement edge and things like that. So it was felt that it wasn't as safe. MR. D. BLAKE: I had a couple more, Mr.

Chairman. They just escaped me for a minute. I'm getting mixed up with the construction program. MR. CHAIRMAN: We're on 7.(a), Motor Transport Board. MR. D. BLAKE: We can cover the waterfront here maybe and get it passed. I just have a question on cabs. We can wait till we get down there a little bit. MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll deal with this

section by sect ion. We're on Motor Transport Board. The Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr . Chairman, the Min ister mentioned in his remarks to qu estions from my colleague that he believes there should be changes in the hours of opera tion, that drivers should be permitted to run presumably for a week. Could the Minister indicate what this proposal to the Federal Government would be in that regard? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I have pro posed that there be hours of work legislation.

We have not stated how long those precisely should be, and how much time there should be in rest periods and so on and how many total hours in a week. That's something that we're work ing out . Perhaps we have some additional information. So we didn't give the precise details, where we said this is the way it should be. What we did say though is that there should be an enforceable hours of work legislation in place across Canada that is uniform, and it should be enforced.

So the CCMT A Comm ittee has been requested to bring in a report for the Sept ember meeting of the Council of Transport Ministers on this issue, that we then can assess and make revi sions to and then hopefully it would be accepted by all of the Mi nis ters from across Canada. MR. D. ORCHARD: The Minister is saying that all he wants is some legislation but he doesn't have any idea what the legislation should be. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's the Member for Pembina's words. We haven't worked out a definitiv e position into whether it should be 10 hours a day, or so many hours a week, or what it should be.

The fact is tha t we want to un dertake fur the r discussions with staff and also await the CCMT report, which is being put forward. They will have to consider 967 the workability of any provisions that are put in place, the enforceability of them. We are open on that, as yet. However, realize that there is a need to have enforceable regulations, for safety reasons. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr . Chairman, those aren't my words. Those are the Minister's words, twice repeated now. He wants legislation and he doesn't know what he wants in the legislation. He hasn't made a suggestion as to hours; it's still under review.

Can the Minister indic ate why he's come to the conclusion that this is needed, if he hasn't got any of what he wants to change it to? HON. J. PLOHMAN: The Member for Pembina is quite welcome to offer suggestions if he has such a keen mind that has all of this figured out and knows exactly what the best system would be. lt is obviously a very compl icated area that has led to a safety code being established in the Un ited States after quite some time, but not one that has been solved in Canada.

We're saying that because there will be a tendency to cut costs, and I think this is some thing that the Member for Pembina should have no trouble agreeing with and recog nizing, as has been true in the airline indus try where there's been a rash of accidents, the tendency is, under dereg ulation.

I agree with those who write with that message, certain ly, and there's a lot of articles in trucking magazine s, in transportation magazines now that would outline that concern, that safety will tend to be sacrificed under a deregula ted environment, because there's only so many places you can cut costs under an extremely competitiv e syst em. That's why we feel it's absolut ely necessary to have basic requirements for equipment, inspec tion, to ensure that it is kept up in a safe manner, brakes and lights and everyt hing else.

We also feel it's important that those people working in the industry have certain guide lines governing how many hours they can be working and under what conditions, so that there's some protection there to keep them from being unduly exploited to the extent that it may be unsafe to have them on the roads. These are all kinds of things that I feel personally are very impo rtant when moving to a deregul ated environment in the trucking indus try, as well as in all of the transportation areas. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr . Chairman, the Mi nis ter can't have it both ways, then.

If he thinks it's very impo rtant and if he thinks it's a saety issue, if he thinks it's an issue of exploitation of workers, if he believes in all those things, then I find it hard to understand or comprehend why he can't tell us this afternoon what his proposal for change would be, given all the concerns that he's mentioned. I think what we see here, Mr.

Chairman, if I can be so blunt, is that he is a Min ister being led around by some opinions voiced by various union leaders who have always requested this. lt's in their interest to have stricter controls, more drivers and fewer hours, and it discrimi nates against independent operators - there's no question about that - if you bring in those kinds of legislation. Then, of course, the independent operators are private-enterprise exemplified and that's something this

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 Minister and his government don 't particularly believe in. I can understand the Minister coming up with a position supporting this kind of legislation. What I can't understand is why he doesn 't have any idea of what he would propose becaus e it's only when he comes up with those kinds of ideas that the Manitoba Trucking Association, and those involved in the industry, can tell him whether he's right or wrong .

As long as he hides behind this alleged need for this kind of legislation from a safety standpoint, from an employee exploitation standpoint, and all of the usual shibboleths tossed up by the labour unions . HON. J. PLOHMAN: A bunch of garbag e. MR. D. ORCHARD: The Minister says garbage . That was his answer five minutes ago, that he just now called garbage, Mr. Chairman . This Minister is a very confused young man. Mr.

Cha irman, if he believes in those kinds of areas, then surely he should be coming to this committee with a position, not simply saying, you know, all of the shibboleths from the union movement are right and yet he doesn 't offer any original thought as to what he believes should be the new changed system . Then, I presume , if it is changed by the Federal Government, he leaves himself wide open by not having told us what he believes in and what he thinks is correct and proper .

That would leave him wide open to cri tici ze any move the Fede ral Government would undertake , which is the position this government wants to be in consistently ; no original thoughts of their own , no solutions to the problem of their own, but rather simply a tailback posit ion where they can then always decry any move made by another jurisdiction in the Federal Government. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, the Member for Pembina should be ashamed of himself to suggest that it's only labour that would be concerned about safety .

It is something that all those companies involved, all interests involved in the transportation sector, are concerned about . It is something that all governments across Canada have indicated a concern about. That is why, not just because the Manitoba Government has asked for it - that is precisely why the CCMTA has been instructed to bring back a report on how best to implement this , to the next meeting of the Council of Transportation Ministers .

It is a federal responsibility, one that they want to consult with the provinces on, and we think that is a very constructive way to proceed in suc h a very complicated area . It's an area that deserves a lot of consideration by people working in the areas themselves. It involves consultation with groups and individuals and a lot of discussion, debate . There's no simplistic solution to it.

What the Member for Pembina is asking me to do is give some individual or private thoughts on the record so th at perhaps, if that isn't the final position, he can later say, in the same way that he said I want to criticize , he can turn around and criticize me and say, well , you didn't get what you wanted and you're obviously way out to lunch. The point is, it is not something that should be dealt ... I think it's irresponsible to start going into general 968 areas, forays of thought on what is the right decision here.

It's something that should be discussed and consultation should take place and it's federal jurisdiction . We will have input into that; We are having input. We will await the federal report and then we'll make recommendations on the basis of what is presented by the CCMTA Committee . I can tell the honourable member that he could ask any of his colleagues in the Conservative Party, who are in government in other jurisdictions, for their specific position and proposals on this issue , inc ludi ng his federal counterpart, the Federal Minister, and they will not have specific proposals at this time .

They are awaiting the report of the experts who are involved and who have been asked to come up with the alternatives so that we can consider them . We will do that in good time and certainly , I believe, solve this issue, solve this problem , to the sat isfaction of the majority of interest and for the protec tion of the public in Canada. MR. D. ORCHARD: Mr. Cha irman, that's a very in teresting non-statement the Minister just made because, you know, the Canad ian Council of Motor Transport Administrators , Manitoba has representation on it.

They theoretically are making this outlin e proposal for the Federal Government, for the Minist er of Highways and Transporat ion safety across Canada . Manitoba 's repr esentat ion is on that organization and this Minister just told us they're going there withou t a position. That's the whole point that I'm makin g to the man, he doesn't have a position on the issue. If he wanted to be a leader he could be, but he isn't. Mr. Chairm an, I want to ask the Minister another question .

I corresponded with this Minister for a couple of years now on a holiday combination of a three-qua rter ton truck , fifth-wheel hitch on a fifth-wheel holiday traile r, and a boat and motor trailer behind that, so you actually have three vehicles. Could the Minister indic ate what the current driving status of that combination is? HON. J. PLOHMAN : Mr. Chairman , we are just beginning with the formulation of the report , who are the CCMTA on the previous matter, and I'm going to be getting a report very soon from our representatives on that committee , for the Member for Pembina's information .

In addition, he has raised a matter of the fifth-wheel trailer combinations. I have had a lot discussions with the department , been made aware, of course, that Saskatchewan and Ontario have provis ion for this , although that does not take away from the fact that department officials did feel it was somewhat of an unsafe practice , or could be construed as such under certain conditions . I have talked to a number of people who have made representation the same as has been made by the Member for Pembina , indiv iduals throughout Manitoba.

There have been a numbe r who have written or called me on this and asked why this difference existed between Manitoba, Saskatchewa n and Ontari o. So we intend to address that issue in the upcom ing legislation that will be tabled in the House for second reading very shortly . MR. D. ORCHARD: I take from that, the legislatio n will see us uniform with Saskatchewan and Ontario then?

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's the intent of the legislation, Mr . Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: On that same item, Mr. Chairman, it's not legal now to have, say, a crew cab with a fifth wheel on it and a boat and motor behind that, it's not legal? HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's right, not legal in Manitoba. How many years have you been using it? MR. D. BLAKE: I'd better not pursue that question any furth er, Mr. Chairman. I guess I've never been stopped yet. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(a). MR. D. BLAKE: On board hearings under the High way Traffic Board . . . MR.

CHAIRMAN: Is it ?.(a)- pass, or are we still on 7.(a)? MR. D. BLAKE: Well, if you want to do it line by line, I'm finished on Motor Tra nsport Board. MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we should. In this case, they're reasonably discreet. MR. D. BLAKE: Perhaps my colleagues have a question on that. MR. CHAIRMAN: ?.(a)- pass; 7.(a)(1) -pa ss; 7.(a)(2)­ pass. 7.(

b) Highw ay Traffic Board - the Memb er for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: On the board hearings, I'm getting the odd trucker in my area who's maybe trying to benefit, get the benefit of a backhaul and had one or two infractions about hauling illegal loads that had been called before the board.

With the strained financial situation in the agricultural community these days, I trust the board will be listening to some of these appeals with a sympathetic ear, and then I guess the same type, they may be applying for a PSV if they can't get away with hauling it the way they have been doing, but ther e seems to be quite a few occasions where they could haul a return load and make their trucking a little more economical. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I believe the member is talking about farmers with F-plated trucks? MR. D. BLAKE: Yes. HON. J.

PL OHMAN: The provisions there are the same as always, that they can haul for their neighbour s. Ho wever, if they want to make mone y at it, in other words, get into the trucking business, and not only recover their out-of-pocket costs in helping their neigh bour, then they have to get a PSV licence which does cost more mone y. But because of the designa ted commodities, now the expansion of the list, there are 969 all kinds of opportunities for them to get that backhaul as the member mentioned.

The fact is though that, if they have a backhaul for thems elves, there is no problem; if they are charging someone else for hauling it back, above and beyond the costs of transporting it, then of course they are in a situation . . . MR. D. BLAKE: Yes, this is where I think the difficulty comes in. They are hauling a legitimate load out and an offer comes up to make a buck on the way back and they can't jus tify it as hauling it for their neighbo ur. If people apply for a PSVR, are they reasonably easy to pick up, or is there a pretty severe limit on how many get them? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I don't believe there is a limit - and correct me if I'm wrong - on this area for PSV licences. it's specific PSV authorities to do certain movements within certain areas that require a hearing. As far as the lic ences, th ey just have to make application, and I believe there may be a test of fit, willing and able - some questions to answer about whether they are financially able to carry out the service. MR. D. BLAKE: We have a lot of grain that goes out to, say, Alberta, places like that, and they may have difficulty with a PSV lic ence interfering with some other franchise.

So it may not be that easy for them to get a PSV lic ence, I suppose. HON. J. PLOHMAN: No, it's easier than it used to be and, as a matter of fact, we're dealing with the licence, as opposed to the author ity. it's not interfering as long as they are hauling desig nated commoditi es . The designa ted commodi ties were accepted by all thr ee western provinces during joint hearings.

So, if they're hauling any of those goods now, which is quite an expanded list - I don't have it right here, but I could read off a whole pile of different commod ities now that are known as desig nated commodities - for which you do not need a specific PSV authority which is again the hard one to get. I think the member is referring to that one. He says there may be some difficulty about infringing on somebody else's franchise. This is not the case. If you 'r e dealing with the PSV licenc e (I nterjection) - that's right. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Springfield. MR. G.

ROCH: Yes, I read where the Chairman of the Manitoba Traffic Safety Commi ttee said it hopes to introduce new legislation which will reduce motorcycle casualties. I take it, that means yourself as Minister , would be introducing that legislation. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, first of all I just want to clarify - the Transport Board was passed and we were just answering questions on the Transport Board. But anyway now we're on the Tr affic Board, this is not the Hig hway Safety ... MR. G. ROCH: Oh, I'm sor ry, I thought it came under the Traffic Board . . . HON. J.

PLOHMAN: No, it's not the same as the Hig hway Safety Commit tee which is not an official

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 comm ittee that is under the jurisdiction of the Mi nister of Highways, particul arly. That commit tee reports to the Min ister responsible for the Ma nitoba Pub lic In surance Corporation. But I might add this person who did make the comments apparently was misquo ted on that and I have not received a clarification as to what he exactly said. I think he was referring to amendments and changes that had been made in previous years, as opposed to up coming ch anges to legisl ation tha t involv e motorcycles, because there are no plans currently , as we have dis cussed in detail.

There are currently studies being undertaken, statistics being compiled, and we're certainly not considering at this time introducing changes until we have a chance to assess what's taken place in the past. MR. G. ROCH: This was misquo ted then. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. A comp lete misquo te is what would be accurate. MR. G. ROCH: For clarification then, if it's a misquo te, then there's no point in pursuing it, but if such legislation were to be introduced, it would be from your department or from the Minister res ponsible for MP IC. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr .

Cha irma n, if there were changes in The High way Traffic Act, obviously that comes under the Min ister's responsibility for Highways and Tra nsportation, and it is under The Highway Traffic Act that the safety legislation was previously passed. MR. G. ROCH: This comm ittee itself is a commit tee for reporting to the Minister responsible for MP IC. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Yes, and it's an advisory comm ittee on ly. lt does not have any statutory auth ority. lt is made up of mem bers from police departments and from the safety council, the medical profession, legal, Highways Department, driv er licensing, City of Winnipeg, MP IC. All of these come together to discuss ways of making our highw ays safer and making recommendations to the Ministers. MR. G. ROCH: Basically the only power you have is to make reco mmendations on hig hway safety. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's right, on highw ay safety. MR. G.

ROCH: Ok ay, I have another question which I believe falls under the High way Tra ffic Board . lt's in regard to speed zones. I just wonder why, in certain areas, there is quite a variance in the limited number of miles where you'll go from 70 kilometres, to 90 kilome tres, back to 70, 50, 70, back to 90. I'm referring especially in an area on provincial roads 213 and 212 from 206 to Cooks Creek. There's no villages there or anything and some of the residents are wondering why there's not more consis tency. There may be a good reason for it, I don't know. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, Mr.

Chairman, I would have to have the details of that specific situation, then get a report as to why the speed limits are as they are there. 970 If the municipaliti es wish to have them changed, they could send in a resolution to the Traffic Board, and this would then be considered for a change. So there's a method of making changes in those speed limits, if it's confusing to motorists. MR. G. ROCH: So the proper channels then for those people might be to go through their local council to make a request?

I could understand in the area of Cooks Creek itself, which is a very small commun ity, to have it 50 kilometres; but there seems to be a wide variance around there. Ok ay, I'll advise the people to go to their local council. Thank you, Mr . Chairman. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, and just to clar ify, the local councils will obviously tell them that they haven't authority to make the change itself per se, but the council can't if it's a provincial road, but they can pass a resolution sending it to the Traffic Board, asking for this to be changed. MR. G. ROCH: Right, I am aware of that. MR.

CHAIRMAN: 7.(b)(1)-the Member for Minnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: While we're on that, we were discussing the 100 kilometre versus 90. I don't know whether we covered that or left it for this

section before. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think we did cover it, Mr. Chairman. I outlined the proposal, the number of kilom etres that the department was recom mending and that over a period of time these would be incr eased through hearings of the Traffic Board. MR. D. BLAKE: Are those hearings upcoming? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, there's been a number that have taken place already, Mr . Chairman. There's been changes since last year - since this was made - on High way 5 to the Saskatchewan bord er, from Dauphin. There's been a number on the list on Highway 83 up near Swan River , so it's ongoing. MR. D.

BLAKE: I realize that. I'm thinking of No. 10 with the tourist season coming on. There's a pretty heavy flow of traffic ther e and it's pretty confusing coming off 16, which is 100, and turning north and you're back on 80, or 90 rather. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We've asked as a result of the initial questions the other day for an updated report on the status of where we're at on implementation of that. There are a number that we've just listed.

Hig hway 12 was also one that was added, so the numbers have been incr eased to 100 kilom etres, and I think I mentioned the other day as well that it would have to meet certain specifications in terms of shoulder width. But we should have a report available within a week or two to provide additional information on the status of that and I can do that to the member individually or in the Hous e, in answer to questions. MR. D. BLAKE: On Highw ay 83, from where it joins the Yellowhead at Russell, it's 90 kilo metres to Swan

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 River and then from there on, it's 100; and coming the other way it's a little confusing to people. Thev come off a 100 kilometre stretch through to 90 ana then 5 down, it's still 100. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(b)(1)-pass; 7.(b)(2)- pass. ?.(

c) License Suspension Appeal Board-the Member for Mi nnedosa. MR. D. SLAKE: Yes, maybe here the Mi nis ter could tell me now where Mr . Shewchuk is now working. Is he still with the License Suspension Appeal Board, or is that a term contract? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr . Ch airman, ther e was a competition held, I believe some six months ago as we had indicated last year after the individual was moved on a term basis, temporary - Ken Shewchuk - there was a competition held at the License Suspension Appeal Board and another individual was selected as the candi date and is now working in that position.

I don't know where Mr. Shewchuk is working right now. I'm not sure. We are not sure. MR. D. SLAKE: I wonder if the Minister could give us the makeup of the License Suspension Appeal Board now and wha t is their worklo ad with th e new regulations? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I'm sorry , I missed part of that question. MR. D. SLAKE: I just wanted the makeup of the License Suspension Appeal Board and what is the workload like now with the new regulations, where there's no work permits issued for thr ee months? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I don't know that they've felt a drama tic change yet.

I see that the License Suspension Appeal Board Chairman is sitting in the back and his secret ary, so they may want to come up and whisper in somebody's ear as to wh ether they've seen a big difference as a result of the federal legislation on drinking and driving in December . lt was enacted last Decem ber, so we've only got a certain few number of months to go by it, but, overall, the number of cases was up from 4,044 in'84-85, the number of applications processed in'84-85 from 4,044 to 4,293 this past year. So there was a slight increase up to the Ma rch 31 fiscal year as compared to the previous year .

From April to June this year, compar ed to last year, I'm informed that we're down about 250 applications. Say, if that's half the year , that's about 2,000, so you're looking at 10 percent. MR. D. SLAKE: Yes, I realize the federal legislation and I'm not trying to take away from the seriousness of the offence, but I am wondering if there is any - what's the word I'm looking for - any move to make a provision in there for - and I'm thinking of a hired man, say on a farm operating farm machi nery - should he be suspended for thr ee months with no driving privilege at all?

He's unabl e to operate the farm machi nery and he's really of no value to that employer. So does he throw himself on the welfare system? I'm 971 wondering if there is any move to provide some type of limited working permit for, say machiner y, if it's his livelihood. HON. J. PLOHMA N: Well, Mr . Chai rman, tha t is precisely the point that we made on a number of occasions to the Federal Government when they passed this legislation, and they ignored it.

The fact is that we have a system that is responsive in the province and recognizes the need for lic ences for work purposes through the License Suspension Appeal Board, but under the new act there's a prohibition from driving for thr ee months where the License Suspension Appeal Board can have no impact. We have made that case to Mr . Crosbie, but through the Attorney General; we have also made tha t case through Mr . Mazankowski through Transporta tion. I raised it at the last meeting of the Council of Ministers in Vancou ver, specifically that issue. He said that he would pass it along to Mr .

Crosbie, but we have not seen any reflection of that situation here in Manitoba. Not all provinces are the same; I don't believe all of them have License Suspension Appeal Boards that work the similar way that ours does, but I agree that there's really a double penalty or more for those certain people and for others there isn't. So it isn't consistent, and I felt that there should be that flexibility even though, as the member has stated, it is a very serious offence but in terms of livelihood it's important.

I think tha t the member should attempt to make that kind of represe ntation to his colleagues in Ottawa - I say that very seriously - to make that as strong ly and as often as he can. MR. D. SLAKE: it's creating some severe hardships in one or two cases that have been brought to my attention. I said, well, there is really nothing that can be done about it but possibly they'll maybe become a little more sympathetic to the work conditions that some people are under. I'm thinking of a long-r ange truck er. Mind you, he shouldn't be in that condition to start with but, as you say, it's a considerable penalty.

He would be earning his living under a considerable handicap even with the probationary period. The workload is no different because it just staves it off for three months, I guess, so they still come to the Appeal Board . MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(c)(1)- pass; 7.(c)(2)-pass. ?.(

d) Taxicab Board - the Member from Minnedosa. MR. D. SLAKE: Yes, I am just looking at some of the reports, Mr. Chairman, of the complaints that come in on taxicabs and the city being not in good condition, dirty and uncourteous drivers and things of that nature. I wonder if the Mi nister might tell us what his experience has been, if he's had those comments or complaints. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, I've been made aware, Mr . Chairman, of these concerns and I know that the Taxicab Board is very concerned about them. I think they feel that perhaps it has been a little bit exaggerated, at least not that it's not a real problem at times but tha t it's kind of a broad-brush treatment of the taxicab

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 industry in the City of Winnipeg, and it has given perhaps the taxicab industry a bad name, smeared them a bit with this. lt's made it very difficult, unfair in a way is how they feel, not that it isn't unfounded though under certain circums tances. So they have been taking steps to meet with owners and individuals to impr ess the impor tance in meeting with the community of the Chamber of Com merce.

There was a comm ittee set up and made up of a number of inter ested citizens that has also been providing representation on this issue to ensure that hotel associations are involved and Cham bers of Com merce. We have received letters from I think a couple of groups, perhaps a hotel in the city and I believe an individual, not an awful lot of complaints but it did find its way into the media. lt is some thing that the Taxicab Board has addr essed and I believe that they are taking steps. I'm not certain whether they have done anything in terms of any training or information.

I am informed there are new examinations that will be coming forward to be ready for September that will emphasize this whole area of keeping the cabs in a presentable condition for the public and the impact that this has on the public and tourists and so on. MR. D. BLAKE: Yes, under this board, the handi- van, or the vehicles used to transport the handicapped, is now under the Taxi Board - June 30? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Strictly speaking, they are not under the jurisdiction. The regulation is to take effect under the jurisdiction of the Taxicab Board on June 30 of this year; in other words, two weeks. MR. D.

BLAKE: And this decision was made in full consult ation with the League for the Ph ysically Hand icapped and all other interested parties. The Taxicab Board and everybody has agreed with one exception, I suppose. So these regulations are going to be satisfactory and fair to the handicapped? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, I think they're going to be fairer than the unregula ted system that was there before. lt's interesti ng.

We talk about reg ulation and dereg ulation, and here is a case where we're moving into regulating where in so ma ny aspects of the transportation indus try they're moving the other way; but there were no safeguards in terms of standards for safety, standards for fares, on level of service, this was all over the map, and it was felt that users of the system, as well, should have somewhere to go to place their complaints and concerns that they may have.

So we feel that it is a constructive move; it certainly hasn't been easy. lt was to be done a year ago but was put off because we felt it was very important to have proper consultation with the industry who initially didn't want it, but then it came around to feeling that it might be a good thing for them as well and the users of the system being represented by their organizations, such as the League and the Canadian Paraplegic Associati on, seniors' groups and others.

There's been general agreement now on the kinds of fares that should be assessed, additional fares for special services on the safety requirements, some 972 recognition that these have to be perhaps ph ased in over a period of time, that it was not economically possible for some of the cab companies to afford, the hand icapped, mobility disadv antaged taxi companies, to afford the kinds of provisions and equipment; so it was an effort to look at all of these considerations and then move towards a better system, a safer system and one that was economical for the users of the system .

We haven't got to the stage where the social services departments are plugged into it in such a way that there are offe ring it as a social service, as I think Theresa Ducharme would like to see. We're continuing to meet with her and then seeing whether it's possible, under other departments over a period of time, to making this even more access ible to thos e who can't afford it. lt's not something that's really an ensured service. MR. D. BLAKE: The only subsidi zation would be through someone on social service assistance.

With the assistance allowance they're getting, they would provide their own transportation out of that. There's no other HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ther e's some transportation allowances, I believe, under the social services but no special provisions for the use of special requirements under this, yes. MR. CHAIRMAN: 7.(d) (1)- pass; 7.(d)(2)-pass. Resolution 96: Resolved that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exce eding $1,189,600 for Hig hways and Transportation - Boards and Comm ittees, for the fiscal year ending the 31st of March, 1987- pass.

We are now on Resolution 97, Expenditures Related to Capital, Page 99. MR. D. BLAKE: This is where every body wants questions now. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr . Chairman, I wonder whether the member, he may have a number of questions himself but it may be possible to work through (b), (c), and (

d) or someth ing. If there's a number of people who aren't here ... MR. D. BLAKE: I think they'll be jumping in so if we just maybe do it all and then pass the whole thing. We'll be jumping around quite a bit on it. Mr . Chairman, I had a call just today and I haven't had a chance to look at the map even yet. Highway 206 has been reconstructed in the - I guess it's the hig hway leading to Landmark - there's a newly built road or reconstructed road in there. I wonder what property was acquired there.

I haven 't had a look at the operation, but appar ently there's about 10 houses in there and the way the road has been curved in, it comes very, very close to some of the houses. In fact, I think one of them is about 40 feet now off the road and there's some concern with heavy truck traffic maybe shaking the house pretty bad ly. I just wondered why they would come so close to that particular property without maybe expropriating it and relocating it. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I don't know who the individual is. We haven't had any special . . .

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 MR. D. SLAKE: lt's a Roland Nault I think that owns it. There's one house that's extremely close, Roland Nault. A MEMBER: How's that spelt? MR. D. SLAKE: N-a-u-1-t. lt's Nault to us Anglos but it's Nault to the Francophones. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The spelling is N-E-A-U-L- T? The first name is Roland Neault, so we'll look into that. I can just tell you generally though, the members, that was a very tight squeeze in there and his residence is on both sides I'm informed.

There's curves to cut over to an intersection on one end and relocation on the other end and an effort, of course, to be as flexible as possible in terms of the taking of the right-o f-way to not dis locate people any more than had to be done. Of course, they would have received visitations, dis cussions and negotiated and I don't recall receiving any special complaints or saying they weren 't being fairly treated or requesting that there be another look at what we're doing there, as to how much land is being requir ed.

They would have had an opportunity to put forward perhap s a request that they wanted the residents to be relocated or to be bought out or what ever. These things can be discussed. Now, whether he rais ed those, I don't know, at the time. MR. D. SLAKE: Yes, that's my immediate reac tion. If it's that close to the prop erty, obviou sly, it should have been expropriated and relocated in some way. There's always two sides to the story, when you'r e not familiar with the area. The Member for Springside may be a little more familiar with it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Springfield. MR. G.

ROCH: I'm just wondering what was the original reason, the original rationale behind because this is new construction that we're talking about. There's a few feet between where 206 goes into Landmark and 206 went to No. 1, actually were separated. What was the original reason for building this? HON. J. PLOHMAN: We could get the planning minutes, the considerations, the alterativ es that were looked at over a period of time to try and solve the problems of the interse ctions there. The idea was to try to yield one intersection instead of two.

Therefore, relocation was deemed to be the best way to join up 206 with No. 1, with 207 ; so, th ey were looked at a numb er of alternativ es of how to do it, and there was consultation, I believe, in the area with the municip alities and with the ML A at that time, the department locally and the department central office, and eventually decided that was the best route. MR. G. ROCH: Yo u say there was consultation with the residents of the area at that time? HON. J. PLOHMAN: I mentioned the municipal officials. I didn't mention the residents thems elves as to what the plan should be.

They would have been obviously 973 consult ed after the expropriation process began, consulted with regard to the amount of remuneration they should get for their land. I don't know that they were consulted before as to whether it was best to do that or the other. MR. G. ROCH: What's going to happen with that portion of the road which was 206 from where the new 206 will join to 207? Will it remain as a municipal road? Will it be abandoned? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ther e are a lot of planning objectives.

A major one was the amount of traffic that was using 207 at No. 1 Highw ay, going through Lorette and down south to Landmark or other places. They were using 207, instead of using No. 1. The idea here was to impr ove that intersection with No. 1 so that there would be more use, and impr ove the intersection of No. 206 with 207 where it intersected so that there would be more use of 206 right through to No. 1, and take some of the traffic pressure off 207 and the speed re strictions tha t were through Lorette and the intersection of 207 with No. 1.

That was one of the reasons why that was changed, so that there wouldn't be that jog if people didn't feel like using it and, therefore, would stay away from that road. MR. G. ROCH: If I understand you correct ly, the objective was to encourage people to go down No. 1, straight down 206 to Landmark or wherever they're going, with the idea of, ins tead of making a little jog, go straight through. I would take it then from you said, that's going to be all hardtop then. HON. J. PLOHMAN: it's planned for hardtop, Mr. Chairman. MR. G. ROCH: Why is every thing sitting idle right now?

There's no work proceed ing on it right at this moment unless they've started, you know, in the last couple days. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Let me find out, Mr. Chairman, wh at is in the program this year. The member maybe already knows what's in the program with regard to this

section of road but, if it's in the program to finish and carry over, they will finish it. Nobody's told them to not finish it. MR. G. ROCH: No, but I'm just wonderi ng, at this time of the year, why it's not proce eding. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr . Chairman, if conditions warrant, the gr ading would be com pleted and, depending on the

schedule of the contractor who had some work to do there yet, he may have other commitments and hadn't gotten out to this sec tion. I'm not sure. The member would obviously be more aware of whether it's wet there or whether there were any difficulties in getting started there earli er. The program allows for that completion, and then additional gravel and calcium treatment, dust treatment for this coming year. it's never the practice to put the pavement on right away, so obviously it wouldn't be consi dered until next year or the year after.

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 MR. G. ROCH: So if I understand cor rectly , that will be com pleted this summer? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. G. ROCH: Everyt hing but the black-topping. I had another question related to that project and it may be not to do with this question, but there have been some local merchants who have had some problems with one of the sub- contractors with unpaid bills. Do they have any recourse through the department? Do the y ha ve to go to the general contract or, or what kind of recourse would they have? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: There is a hold back provision and, if any of the sub-contractors indic ate to the department that they haven 't got their money after a period of some 30 days or . . . MR. G. ROCH: Oh no, no. Pardon me, Mr . Chairman, what I said was that one of the sub-contractors has got some outst anding bills to local merchants. I'm just wondering do they have any . . . HON. J. PLOHMAN: We don't have dir ect involvement with the su b-contractors at the present time, and there would n't be any recourse. The contractor is paid this mone y.

He pays the sub-contr actors, and it's too far down the line for the department to be holding, because we don't have a contract with the sub-contractors per se. We have a contract with the contractor . He is responsible for paying out the money to his sub­ contractors who are res ponsible for paying their bills. So on that basis, the current system does not allow for the department to hold back anything from the sub­ contractor . MR. G. ROCH: So their only recourse would be just, I guess, civil or other proceed ings against the sub­ contractor . HON. J. PLOHMAN: Small claims or whatever. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Mi nnedosa. MR. D. BLAKE: There's a road, I'm not just too sure - what's being done in the Stead area, would it be 304? What construction is going on up in that area? I had a call from someone who said there's a road being built there, and he's not too sure where it's going. lt doesn't seem to go anywhere. I thought that one had been built through the former Minister's land at Selkirk, but app arently there 's another one tha t's going nowhere. HON. J. PLOH MAN: Mr.

Chairman, this one is obviously a case where we had to look at some relocation of 304 through Stead, where there were a lot of problems with the grade there through the peat area, smoke and burning areas in the past, and also very dangerous narrow gr ade should ers. lt was felt, rat her than upgrading it on its present location and jogging through up close to Powerview there, that it was better ins tead to take it right across to High way 59, from one of the junctions further north and go straight west, across 974 through the Belair Provincial Forest, instead of around the bottom of it.

So what we've done is started the construction from Highway 59. The first seven miles was let in last year's program. lt hasn't been compl eted. We will consider letting the second contractor join it up from where it hits the railway track there, throughout the provincial forest, the CN line, right across to where 304 is currently east, right straight east, at the jog. MR. D. BLAKE: From the first jog, up from the 304? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, there's Stead. There's a jog that goes east and there's a jog up. MR. D. BLAKE: Straight across from there? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. D. BLAKE: Right south to 59? HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Right. So it's straight west from there. lt's relocation of that

section and it is currently under way. Because the whole

section was not contracted in one contract, it will seem to people, who may want to be curious and decide to go down there and take a look, that it goes to nowhere, because at the present time it does go nowhere. lt's currently being constructed and the second portion has not been let. We intend to do that, perhaps, in the pre-tender program, or next year's program, so that it will be completed. There's some property to acquire as well there. The member can understand that through the forest, no private property had to be obtained, and that's why construction started on that end. MR. D.

BLAKE: lt will just go through a couple miles north of Stead, then? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, a few miles north of Stead. The intention, then, is to make a new connection into Stead from the north, straight down. MR. D. BLAKE: That's pretty well all provincial park? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes, right on the bounda ry there. MR. D. BLAKE: That may take a lot of the traffic out of that Stead area. lt might not disturb the birds as much in the fall, Mr . Deputy Minister; it may be helpful. HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's what's behind this. MR. D. BLAKE: That's a couple of them out of the way.

The Newdale access, could you tell me what's happen ing? That was in the plan and I don't know whether there's anything happening there, that access off 16 to the Village of Newdale. it's a pretty dangerous cutoff ther e and there was, I believe, in the proposal, plans to do something on that. HON. J. PLOHMAN: lt certainly rings a bell. MR. D. BLAKE: I don't know whether it was in the proposed . . . yes, Newdale access, in the projects

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 previously programmed. I just wondered what was happening on it. HON. J. PLOHMAN: We ll, th ere are intersection improvements. lt's in there; it's in the carry-over. The intention is to com plete that this year, providing there's no problems . . . MR. D. BLAKE: Yo u'r e just going to put a little curve in there to come back out onto the highw ay at a better angle? HON. J. PLOHMAN: That's supposed to be approved. I don't what the date is for tendering. lt's in the program and I think the intention was that it will be done this year. lt was a carry-over from last year.

So if there are no problems with acquisition - I hope there wouldn't be, otherwise it shouldn't be in here for impr ovements if ther e was still acquisiton to do. lt doesn't indicate that. I can't tell you why it was not done last year but the fact is, there's about $140 million worth of projects that are approved , 1.6 times the amount of expenditure, so in any given year, all projects that are programmed cannot be done and some of them are carried over. lt may be done this summ er, then. I don't know what the projected tendering date is at the present and no one has that information right now. MR. D.

BLAKE: The Stonewall cutoff - would it be 67? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Yes. MR. D. BLAKE: There's some concr ete work being done. Wo uld tha t be the junction of the Stonewall cutoff there on the No. 7? I just wondered what's being done there Is there concr ete work being poured on that intersect ion? There's an irate citizen out there who has called the Premier and every body else. Apparently there's two days work and it's taken 10 or 14 days to complete. He's worrying about the staff not working hard enough on it. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Could I have clarification? The member mentioned 67.

Is he talking about the junction of the Perimeter with 6, or? MR. D. BLAKE: No, it would be the junction of the Fort Garry Road, where it comes across the bog, as they call it, and joins up with No. 7. I assume that that's the junction he was referring to. lt would be the junction of No. 7 and 67. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I don't know whether it's some patching, or whate ver, at Highway 67 and No. 7 from the east is what the member is saying he thinks it is? MR. D. BLAKE: lt's got to be on 7 because he's talking about the danger of the truck traffic.

They're down to one lane and then they're doing the other lane and it's dragged on for an abnormal length of time. That's his complaint, that it should have been done in a couple of days, to allow the truck traffic through. But apparently it dragged on quite a bit. HON. J. PLOHMAN: If that's on the four-land

section in the vicinity of 67 and 7, we'll find out what's going on. 975 MR. D. BLAKE: That seems to be, from what he described to me, as the place for it. I don't want to get into this one maybe until aterwards, because it might take a little while. I want to go into the Plessis Road thing. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Turtle Mountain. MR. D. ROCAN: I wonder if the' Minister can tell us if anything is being done on the 244 between No. 2 and the To wn of Notre Dame. HON. J. PLOHMAN: The question was what , Mr. Chairman? MR. D. ROCAN: Is there anything going to be done? South on 2. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: I didn't get the intersect ion. MR. D. ROCAN: The road, at 244 but south of 2, to the To wn of Notre Dame. HON. J. PLOHMAN: 244 south of 2 to Notre Dame. What's the number of that road? 244. I understand, Mr. Chairman, there is nothing in the program at the present time. Maybe the member would like to enligh ten us as to the importance of doing something there, but there is nothing in tha t area at the present time. MR. D.

ROCAN: lt's just that this road here is in deplorable shape. lt's just that, you know, the potholes, the road has deteriorated, you don't even want to drive there with your car any more, it's that badly shot up. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Well, we have, Mr. Chairman, tha t noted on 244, and we'll take a look at whether we should be beginning a program of upgrading on that road, but it is not currently planned. There may be some revisions or some initial plans from the dis trict on that, but we'd have to check with them first as to what they are proposing. MR. D.

ROCAN: On the 242, from the To wn of Somerset to the junction of 245 - and, as the Mi nister already knows, on the 245, from Notre Dame going west , it's blacktopped already, but it goes to nowhere. Is ther e anything in the plans of connecting up to the 242, blacktopping the 242? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Mr. Chairman, from 245 to 23, that

section of 242? I'll just check the program, Mr . Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the budget obviously doesn't indicate that we can. When we come back, we can have some additional information as to what the plans are on that

section of road. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hour being 4:30, we interrupt the proce edings for Private Members' Hour and return at 8:00 p.m. SUPPLY - AGRICULTURE MR. CHAIRM AN, C. Sa ntos : This

section of the Comm ittee of Supply has been considering the budget

Tuesday, 17 June, 1986 Estima tes of the Department of Agriculture. We are in Item No. 4.(d) (2 ) Soil s and Crops Branch, Other Expenditures. The Honourable Min ister of Agriculture. HON. B. URUSKI: Mr . Chairman, I wish to provide for honourable members - during our discussion last night, we spoke about the cost of agricultural chemicals, as faced by farmers, and I wish to table for the honourable members - a copy of our brief paper on the cost of agricultural chemicals that was presented to the Mi nis terial Conference in St. Johns, Newfoundland in July of 1985 so that honourable members would be aware of it.

As well, I want to provide some information for the honourable members on lupins and lathyrus, Mr . Chairman. Manitoba Agriculture has selected two lines of sweet lupins that have good promise for commercial production in certain areas of the province. The lupin is an annual legume, high-pr otein feed crop which can be produced on sandy soil, because it has good tolerance to drought. The lupin has the following important features. The seed has a protein content varying between 30 percent and 45 percent. This is considerably higher than the faba bean, grass pea and field pea.

The crop holds good potential as a source of protein for feed ing to mo noga stric animals, particularly swine and poul try. The lupin is very drought­ tolerant, allowing for production on light soils in areas of the province where annual legume crops, such as, faba beans cannot be successfully grown. The crop requi res 115 to 125 days to reach maturi ty, but has good frost tolerance in the seed ling stage, allowing for early planting. The lupin readily forms good nodula tion when inocu lated with a specific inoculant.

Lupin production can be ha ndled with the same equipment used in cereal grain production, therefore requiring no special equipment. The current seed supplies of the two strains of lupins are quite small, and two years of seed increase will be necessary before large field production demonstrations can be initiated. Some laboratory tests with feeding of rats have been cond ucted at the Uni versity of Manitoba. Additional feeding trials will be undertaken by the livestock group.

Information regarding the lathyrus sativus, which is commonly known as the grass pea, Agriculture Canada Research Station at Morden has developed a low­ alkaloid strain of the grass pea. The development of this strain holds good promise for the introduction of a new annual legume crop in Manitoba. The grass pea has the following important features.

The seed has a protein content of 26 percent to 28 percent, 2 percent high er than field peas. it's approximate maturity is 100 to 110 days. lt grows to the height of about 60 centimetres, two to two-and-a­ half feet tall. lt is very drought- tolerant, and equals field peas in frost tolerance. Its nitrogen-fixing capability appears to be higher than field peas. The low-alkaloid varieties of the grass pea are expected to be suitable for human, as well as animal consumption. lt is anticipated that the low-alkaloid variety developed at the Mor den station will be licensed in 1987.

This will mean that only small investigational 976 plots can be grown in 1986 to establish suitable cultural pr actices. Simu ltaneous ly, seed suppli es can be increased. When suppli es are adequate, larger field-scale demonstration sites can be established to demons trate the production of this new annual legume crop. Tests for grass peas as human food and feeding trials for annual animal feed in the form of forage and grain will also be required. Mr. Chairman, as well, I have asked staff and they're being sent down to provide copies for my honourable friends of the . . .

They can be photostated right now so that for the next section, the Farm and Rural Development Division, we'll have an overview presented to the honourable members of that division of the major areas under this division. If the Page could take this copy and make about half-a-dozen copies for members, then they'll have it when we reach the next section. Mr. Chairman, I think, rather than put all this additional information about demonstrations and summa ry of all the horticulture demonstrations by Manitoba Agriculture and the Un iversity of Ma nitoba and the Mo rden Research Station, we have a varying list.

I would table this so it would be copied, and copies can be distrib uted to honourable members for their records. I won't put it into the record. lt will be there for them. We can present it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Ste. Rose. MR. G. CUMMINGS: I'd like to thank the Minister for provi ding that additional information for us.

I assume that, as we go on into Policy and Economics, he could perhaps table some additional information at that point, the fact being that many of us on this side who are new to this House and new to this process in asking questions, without having background information, sometimes I'm sure we prolong the Session more than is possibly necessary in the eyes of some people probing to find certain answers that might be provided to us. If the Min ister could give us additional information up front our questions could be a lot more concise and perhaps a lot more productive.

An example, I guess, of where I would ask under Other Expenditur es, we're still on Line 2, is this where the Minis ter's prepared to answer questions on the Value-Added Crops Agreement, or would he sooner have that carried forward to the Federal-Provincial Agreement section? HON. B. URUSKI: Mr . Chairman, the same Assistant Deputy Mi nister will be back for that one. it is actually at the end, und er the Item 7., Federal-Provincial Agreements, but we've been into it and out of it.

I leave it to my honourable friends, if they want to have the questions now or they want to leave it till we reach that item, I leave it to them. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Unde r the Soils and Crops Branch, under the staff breakdown - if I could ask