ISSN 0542-5492 Second Session - Thirty-Second legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba PR DEBATES and CEEDINGS 31-32 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable D. James Walding Speaker VOL XXXI No. 155 -10:00 a.m., FRIDAY, 6 JANUARY, 1984. Printed l>Y the Office of the Quee ns Printer. Provines of Manitoba

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Second legislature Members, Constituencies and Political Affiliation Name ADAM, Hon. A.R. (Pete) ANSTETT, Hon. Andy ASHTON, Steve BANMAN, Robert (Bob) BLAKE, David R. (Dave) BROWN, Arnold BUCKLASCHUK, Hon. John M. CARROLL, Q.C., Henry N. CORRIN, Brian COWAN, Hon. Jay DESJARDINS, Hon. Laurent DODICK, Doreen DOERN, Russell DOLIN, Hon. Mary Beth DOWNEY, James E. DRIEDGER, Albert ENNS, Harry EVANS, Hon. Leonard S. EYLER, Phil FILMON, Gary FOX, Peter GOURLAY, D.M. (Doug) GRAHAM, Harry HAMMOND, Gerrie HARAPIAK, Harry M. HARPER, Elijah HEMPHILL, Hon. Maureen HYDE, Lloyd JOHNSTON, J.

Frank KOSTYRA,Hon. Eugene KOVNATS, Abe LECUYER, Hon. Gerard LYON, Q.C., Hon. Sterling MACKLING, Q.C., Hon. Al MALINOWSKI, Donald M. MANNESS, Clayton McKENZIE, J. Wally MERCIER, Q.C., G.W.J. (Gerry) NORDMAN, Rurik (Ric) OLESON, Charlotte ORCHARD, Donald PAWLEY, Q.C., Hon. Howard R. PARASIUK, Hon. Wilson PENNER, Q.C., Hon. Roland PHILLIPS, Myrna A. PLOHMAN, Hon. John RANSOM, A. Brian SANTOS, Conrad SCHROEDER, Hon. Vic SCOTT, Don SHERMAN, L.R. (Bud) SMITH, Hon. Muriel STEEN, Warren STORIE, Hon. Jerry T. URUSKI, Hon. Bill USKIW, Hon. Samuel WALDING, Hon. D. James Constituency Ste.

Rose Springfield Th0rnpson La Verendrye Minnedosa Rhineland Gimli Brandon West Ell ice Churchill St. Boniface Riel Elmwood Kildonan Arthur Emerson Lakeside Brandon East River East Tuxedo Concordia Swan River Virden Kirkfield Park The Pas Rupertsland Logan Por tage la Prairie Sturgeon Creek Seven Oaks Niakwa Radisson Charleswood St. James St. Johns Morris Roblin-Russell St. Norbert Assiniboia Gladstone Pembina Selkirk Transcona Fort Rouge Wolseley Dauphin Turtle Mountain Burrows Rossmere lnkster Fort Garry Osborne River Heights Flin Flon Interlake Lac du Bonnet St.

Vital Party NOP NDP NOP PC PC PC NOP IND NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC PC PC NOP NOP PC NOP PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP PC PC NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP PC PC PC PC PC PC NOP NOP NOP NOP NOP PC NOP NOP NOP PC NOP PC NOP NOP NOP NOP

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Friday, 6 January, 1984. Time - 10:00 a.m. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Hon. J. Walding: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . MI NI STERIAL STATEM ENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. R. PENNER: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to file the first Annual Report of the Public Trustee for the years 1982-83 and the 11th Annual Report of Legal Aid Manitoba for the year ending March 31, 1983. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Education. HON. M.

HEMPHILL: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table the Teachers' Retirement Allowances Fund Board 1982 Annual Report and the University of Winnipeg Auditors' Report and Financial Report for the year ended March 31, 1983. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Culture. HON. E. KOSTYRA: I beg leave, Mr. Speaker, to table the Annual Report of the Manitoba Data Services for the year ending March 31, 1983, and the Annual Report of the 1982-83 Manitoba Film Classification Board. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have a statement and copies.

I'd like to make a statement of policy and progress about a project that is not only a key element of Manitoba's current economic strength, but is also an integral part of this government's commitment to ensure that Manitobans are working and continue to work. That program is the Capital projects proposals, sometimes referred to as "The Wish List." · Almost a year ago this government outlined an exciting and energetic

schedule of projects that was submitted to the Federal Government as part of a national recovery program proposed by the Manitoba Government. At the time, some sceptics suggested that these projects, although valuable to our communities, were simply wishful thinking, fantasies that could not be achieved. I am happy to report, Mr. Speaker, that the sceptics were wrong; and I am happy to congratulate those who deserve congratulations most - the people of Manitoba. Manitobans have worked hard and have worked eagerly together to make the Capital projects proposal an unqualified success.

Members opposite suggested that it was useless to try and negotiate with the Federal Government for these projects. Members opposite wouldn't even try. This government did try to gain federal support for this initiative. We tried and we succeeded, Mr. Speaker.

The list of projects that have now been approved in principle includes: Demonstration of trolley bus technology as part of a plan to establish Winnipeg as a world class centre of advanced urban bus industry; an adequate rail line and rolling stock for the Port of Church ill; research, development and possibl e manufacture of lightweight rail cars, within a planned $275 million transportation initiative; a $3.9 million expansion and renovation of the Red Cross Building; $2.7 million expansion and upgrading of the Steinbach Hospital; $1.7 million renovation and upgrading of the Selk irk Mental Health Centre; $1.8 million for improvements to the Flin Flon Hospital; $1.7 million expansion and renovation of the Neepawa Hospital; plus other miscellaneous projects for which more than $17 million of federal and provincial funds are planned.

The list of projects already under way includes: The $41 million NR C Institute for manufacturing science and production technology; the $40 million Manfor modernization; the $8 million South Winnipeg Vocational School; $7.1 million toward acceleration and expansion of the University of Winnipeg Athletic Centre; the Brandon University Music Building that is expected to cost some $6 mil lion ; the $4 mil lion Adolescent Psychiatric Unit; the $5.6 million expansion of the Auto/ Diesel Shop at Red River Community College; a $3.5 million expansion of the Hecia Island Hotel; the $2.5 million Reston Personal Care Home and upgraded hospital; Manitoba's $1.9 million Emergency Services Col lege in Brandon; $1.5 mi llion to accelerate construct ion of rural water and sewer services; some $900,000 for Northern water and sewer services; $1.3 million for additional forest nursery development and forest stand ma nagement; an d, Mr.

Speaker, approximately $16 mi llion in other miscella neous projects. That list gives you some idea of how much we have accomplished by work ing together since the Premier tabled the Capital project proposals in this House early in 1983. Our accomplishments can also be seen in statistics like an increase of 1.1 percent in Manitoba employment during the last two years, a period during which, Mr. Speaker, employment in Canada as a whole decreased by 0.3 percent. Mr.

Speaker, in light of the success achieved by our Capital project proposals, it is this government's policy that a similar major federal and provincial commitment to economic recovery should be made in every province of Canada by the two levels of government for the next year. The people and Government of Manitoba have led the way. We have demonstrated clearly that great achievements are possible even in the midst of an international economic crisis. Today we say that even 5389

Friday, 6 January, 1984 more is possible now that a period of recovery is under way. Here in Manitoba we mean business. We stand ready to do our part within an all-out national commitment to long-term recovery. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I am embarrassed for this government, that's the only thing I can say. First of all yesterday, Sir, they bring in some list on the Jobs Fund of all the things they have done, and today we come to the Capital projects list.

I suppose we should have been expecting this too, but it's some of the same nonsense as we heard yesterday, couched in the same terms. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr. Speaker, I'm wondering why the Minister, in going through that list, didn't come clean and tell us that $7 million, the monies needed to support some of those projects, came from the Department of Resources; that $20 million came from the Department of Highways, and ripped out of those various departments.

Why didn't he come forward and tell us some of those things again, instead of laying before us a report which on the first page, Mr. Speaker, includes nothing, absolutely nothing of substance, absolutely nothing? Mr. Speaker, I can also talk about the projects individually and specifically. I point out the third one, the "resea rch, develo pment and possible manufacturing." That is a joint initiative funded by the Federal Government. They always come forward in these joint initiative projects and, as such, fund them and aid support to our province. How about this Brandon University?

How many times has that been announced in this House? How many times? Is this the fourth time by this group of people? It is the fourth time. Is anything being built yet? - (I nterjection) - We announced it first. Well, so make that five times, Mr. Speaker. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. I would ask all members to give the honourable member the courtesy of a hearing so that we can all hear what he has to say. The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Mr.

Speaker, I have no alternative but to try and, again, for the members and for the people outside of this House, try and reiterate some of the items not mentioned in this list, some of the same items that were not mentioned in yesterday's list of activities under the Jobs Fund, such that there are 20,000 to 30,000 more people unemployed today than there were three years ago; such that we have the largest deficits in history, $550 million by today's count. Of course, the Minister of Finance yesterday taunted me a little bit and said, well, the deficit is lower than you said it was going to be.

But we haven't seen the revenue side yet, have we? We haven't seen the revenue side yet, and let's wait until we see that, and taxes are at an all time high. We have a new Education Finance Report that's just been laid before us, one that points out the problem and says that we're going to support education, that the only way maybe is to go back to personal incomes and again make us even more uncompetitive than other provincial jurisdictio ns. There's no new job creation in these areas here and the Minister and the government know it, absolutely none. How can there be? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. C.

MANNESS: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, we've touched on some pretty tender nerves across the way. But, Sir, I question whether the government really understands what real job creation means, whether they have an un ders tanding that it's based on investment capital, not publicly, but private investment capital. And, as the Member for Sturgeon Creek so adequately said yesterday in giving forward some of his statistics, that it is failing and falling quickly within this province and only because of some of the situations and some of the detail and some of the taxes that we have within this province.

So I'm not encouraged by this list at all, particularly when we know the source of the funding of it; the source being that it was ripped out of various line departments. We know today what this government is trying to do. They are so desparate that they come before us everyday and lay before us a list of projects that have been named many times. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please.

May I remind honourable members that our Rule 19(4) dealing with routine business does state in part that "A Minister of the Crown may make an announcement or statement of government policy at the time in the ordinary daily routine of business appointed for ministerial statements and tabling of reports." It also says under 19(4) that such statements should not be designed to provoke debate. I would urge any Ministers wishing in the future to make a statement under this item to examine very carefully what it is that they wish to say and that their remarks are in fact in the spirit of 19(4).

Notices of motions . . . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, in view of the encouraging statements from the Member for Fort Garry yesterday suggesting co-operation in the Chamber that might be required to deal with the matter before the House, I would like to ask leave of the House to introduce the bill which appeared on notice yesterday, Bill 115 -

An Act respecting the Operation of

Section 23 of The Manitoba Act. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! 5390

Friday, 6 January, 1984 MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Leave has not been granted. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Have the members finished their shouting? Can we proceed? OR.Al QUESTIONS Manufacturing shipments - decline MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to a question that was addressed to me yesterday by the Member for Sturgeon Creek, a question which I indicated I would be pleased to accept as notice and respond to the honourable member. I must first, Mr.

Speaker, congratulate the honourable member for obviously spending hours and hours going through various percentage changes in respect to various economic factors, as same affects the Provi nce of Mani toba, because the honourable member succeeded in finding the worst possible comparison that he could obtain. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek on a point of order. MR. F. JOHNSTON: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. I certainly believe that I would like to have statistics and everything from the First Minister. Obviously we are getting them everyday by announcements in the House.

If you would check Hansard yesterday, Sir, the First Minister did not take the question as notice. He just said in his statement: I am not familiar with those statistics. He did not say he would take it as notice and bring an answer to the House. I don't mind having the answer, Mr. Speaker, any way he likes. - (Interjection) - MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, if the plea yesterday for the rules to be followed that we heard from the Attorney-General and others, if they mean what they are saying, let them obey the rules. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek did not have a point of order. The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'm really qu ite surprised because I'm sure I indicated yesterday, and I leave it to you to check Hansard, that I was accepting the honourable member's question as one of notice and would be responding to the specific question regarding manufacturing shipments. I'm really surprised that the honourable member this morning does not want to hear my response to the question that he, himself, presented yesterday morning. I don't know, Mr.

Speaker, just where the opposition is coming from. They ask a question - I am sure, Mr. Speaker, I indicated I would be glad to accept the question as notice. I had the detailed information here, now the honourable member doesn't want me to respond, to provide him with an answer. Well, Mr. Speaker, assuming that the honourable member does want an answer to his question, I would like to proceed. Mr. Speaker, as I indicated and I want to congratulate the honourable member at the diligent research that he had undertaken to find the worst possible comparison, because we have 12 economic factors in Canada.

I am pleased to advise that insofar as the 12 economic factors are co ncerned, manuf act ur ing shipments being on e of those 12 economic factors, that the honourable member, though he did succeed in choosing the very worst of the 12, the informat ion that I'll be distributing to the House demonstrates that the economy of the Province of Manitoba, in relationship to the economy of Canada, is doing much better in the period 1981-1983 than in the period 1979-1981, economic indicator by economic indicator. The honourable member selected the one that demonstrated otherwise.

In 11 of the 12, the economy of Manitoba, by way of comparison, is outdistancing, outperforming by way of comparison the economy of Canada insofar as improvement is concerned. I would like to have these sheets distributed to all members of the House. Industrial building permits MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. He says, one in 12, which is what they did for four years; they found one in about 20. But, Mr.

Speaker, my question, I would ask for another one in 12 when I asked yesterday if the First Minister was aware and what was he going to do about the fact that industrial building permits in the Province of Manitoba are down by 9.7 million, 35 percent. Mr. Speaker, the First Minister should look at those statistics also, December 28th in Statistics Canada. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the First Minister could explain, whil e Ma nitoba is down 35 percent, Saskatchewan is up 45 percent. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased to be able to provide some response to the honourable member, and I also accept the responsibility to return to the honourable member with further information that may be of further assistance to the honourable member. Mr.

Speaker, as I indicated yesterday, in case the honourable member is not aware, a report just recently issued by the Department of Reg ional Economic Development in Ottawa, a survey of the 250 largest private industrial corporations in Canada indicates that by way of Capital investment expansion in Canada that Manitoba will lead the way by way of rate of increase in the fiscal year 1984-85. Eight other provi nces, according to the forecast, will show declines. Manitoba leads the 10 by way of percentage increase insofar as industrial expansion, Capital expansion. Mr.

Speaker, I will be pleased to bring the copy of that report. In fact, for the benefit of honourable members, that report was summarized in last week's Globe and Mail illustrating the lead of Manitoba by way of industrial economic expansion forecast for this coming year. 5391

Friday, 6 January, 1984 Mr. Speaker, I am not going to burden the honourable member with a whole series of stats, but to point out to the honourable member that Manitoba has had the largest increase of population in 20 years. In the years 1979-81 under the stewardship of honourable members across the way, Manitoba actually faced a decline in population. During most of the period of time under honourable members across the way, Manitoba had the third-lowest rate of un employ men t .

The unemployment rate in Canada now, insofar as Manitoba is concerned, is the second lowest in the country; that our job retention and job creation records are amongst the best in Canada now, compared to amongst the worst under their administration; that retail sales in Manitoba are the best in Western Canada, in Manitoba under this administration. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek on a point of order. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Speaker, if I recall correct ly, my question for the First Minister was: could he explain why Saskatchewan was up in their industrial building reports, dollars spent in Saskatchewan, up 45 percent while Manitoba was down 35 percent? I wonder if he could give me the explanation to that question, instead of standing up and making a speech every time there's a question asked. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. That is not a point of order. Has the Honourable First Minister completed his answer? The Hon ourable Member for Fort Garry. HON. H.

PAWLEY: My response in respect to the Saskatchewan scene that the honourable member . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. I did ask the First Minister if he had completed his answer, and because he did not rise, I recognized the Ho nourable Member for Fort Garry. The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. L. SHERMAN: Tha nk you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Honourable Minister of Health. Given the opinion rendered by Dr.

Gerry Bristow, the head of Emergency at the Health Sciences Centre and repeated on television last night, that there is what he and other health professionals refer to as a "crisis" in hospitals and health care in this city and in this province and indeed across Canada; given the opinion offered and reported this morning by the Administrator of Grace Hospital, Major Irene Stickland, that there is, and I quote directly "a crisis in this city," can the Minister advise this House whether he intends to continue to hunker down in the bunker and stubbor nly refuse to acknowledge the existence of that very urgent problem, or whether he intends to face up to the kinds of information and evidence being brought to him by his health professionals which testify to that crisis?

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. 5392 HON. L. DESJARDINS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I also heard Dr. Bristow yesterday and remember him being asked these questions. Would you agree with the Minister to say that they're probably paying more, spending more money in Manitoba than in other provinces? He said, yes, that's probably the truth. Would you admit then that it's not only in Winnipeg, it's your hospital. He said, yes, probably every large hospital. Then he was asked, is there a limit to what the people can spend, the tax earned? And he's not the only one.

Just a minute ago we were talking about the large deficit that we had. That's forgotten now I imagine, but we're talking about the large deficit. The doctor said, yes, people are probably expecting too much and some day they will have to be told. The person interviewing said, do you think the time has come? He said, probably, yes. Now, where he disagreed with me, he said that the person interviewing told him that I said there was no crisis, and he said that I didn't understand because I wasn't there. But I did not say that.

I said that I refuted that there was a crisis unless there were people ready to say that there always has been and always will be a crisis in health. That's a diffe rent thing , or a crisis compared to what. I understand and I don't doubt the sincerity of the medical profession who, by t!ie way, Dr. Bristow said that he had informed the Minister in 1980. I took my shoes off and started to count - I wasn't the Minister of Health in 1980. Mr.

Speaker, as far as emergency is concerned, months ago I informed the Health Sciences Centre that the first priority in a fiva-year program that I would recommend to my colleagues, Cabinet and Treasury Board would be to start working on the emergency. That probably should have been started a long time ago. I will make this recommendation, but now we're talking about next year's Budget. I cannot short-cut the system. They've been wanting for me to give the okay and it is completely impossible.

I have to go in front of Treasury and that will be approved or disapproved, and it'll be announced in the House, and I could be questioned at the time. Now, that is something that we want to do. Now, Dr. Bristow also said another thing which is wrong. Dr. Bristow said that it was because of lack of money that there was no intensive care. I repeatedly have checked with the Commission and the point is they can't find the nurses, and I admitted that. I know there are an awful lot of problems and I know there always will be.

I'm not saying that because we shouldn't strive for perfection, but we will not have perfection. We will try that, but in the meantime when I'm talking about a crisis it's not any worse than it was last year. It's a lot better than it was a few years ago. (Interjection) - Well, it's twice that they refuse answers. Do they want to know what's going on? If they want to ask a question, I want to be able to answer the question. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Opposition House Leader. MR. H. ENNS: Are we now entering a debate on health care or is the Minister responding to a question? MR.

SPEAKER: On the same point of order, the Honourable Minister of Health.

Friday, 6 January, 1984 HON. l. DESJARDINS: Exactly, on that same point of order. MR. H. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I'm not asking the Honourable Minister of Health to answer that question, I'm asking for a ruling from the Chair. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. The Ho nourable Minister of Health. HON. l. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, maybe when you have a chance, or somebody has a chance, we'll explain to the new House Leader that he's not the only one that can speak on the point of order. That is exactly my point, Mr.

Speaker, and this is what I've said and this is why we didn't go along with a debate that I would have loved to have yesterday, that we are debating next year's Estimates. If I'm asked questions about next year, I've never ducked a question and I don't intend to now, Gary. I don't, Gary, all right. So if I'm asked a question and if you allow the question, even if it's two years from now, I'll try to answer it. A MEMBER: Do you have a point of order? HON. l. DESJARDINS: As much as he did. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. l. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker . . . MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister on a point of order. HON. H. PAWLEY: It was only a few moments ago that the Member for Sturgeon Creek accused myself in this House of having breached the rules of this House and suggested I was attempting to provide information to the House that I had not taken as notice yesterday. Indeed, that would have been a serious oversight and I think the honourable member would have been correct that indeed it would have been a breach of the rules on my behalf if that indeed had been the case. Mr.

Speaker, I would refer you to the transcript of Hansard of yesterday and I want to read it so that we can clear up once and for all as to whether the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek was correct in suggesting that we had breached the rules on this side of the Chamber yesterday. The transcript reads - the Member for Sturgeon Creek asked: "The First Minister gives statistics of total capital investment. Total private investment is down in the Province of Manitoba, Mr. Speaker.

"I wonder if the First Minister could explain the December 21 st Statistics Canada figures on shipments of manufactured products by origin of province. The Province of Manitoba is down 1.7 percent, ninth in Canada. The only one that the Province of Manitoba is ahead of is Newfoundland.

Can the Minister explain, with all of this great economy, why the manufacturing of Manitoba shipments are down, ninth in Canada?" I responded "I would be glad to take that question as notice, and would be delighted to acquaint the honourable member with a full comprehensive report as to statistical analysis, as to increases by way of various economic indicators." That is so much, Mr. Speaker, for the allegation that I had breached the rules of this House but a few moments ago. MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Ho nourable Member for Sturgeon Creek to the same point.

A MEMBER: Apologize, apologize, come on. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. F. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased that the First Minister was able to read the whole transcript again and I obviously made an error. If I accused the First Minister of breaking the rules, I certainly will apologize for doing so. I would only hope that the members on the other side will apologize when they do the same thing. (Interjection) - You're a louse. MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

It was my clear understanding yesterday that the First Minister did take the matter under advisement which is why he was permitted to give an answer this morning. The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. l. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, it's not my intention to try to deal with the kinds of "answers" that the Minister of Health is giving to my questions that are asked on behalf of the health care commun ity, both professional supplier, and patient and consumer at this time. The Min ister persists in comp arisons and references to funding.

I have not raised the question of funding, I am raising the question of leadership. I am raising the question of attention to a problem and it is not a question that has been raised exclusively or even initially by the opposition. It has been raised by the health care professionals in this province. MR. SPEAKER: Question. MR. l. SHERMAN: I repeat my question which the Minister smoke screened, Mr. Speaker, and that is given the repeated insistence by such health care professio nals as Dr. Gerry Br istow, Major Irene Stickland, and others that there is - and no one said that Dr.

Bristow didn't apply his comments to all of Canada - a health care crisis in this community and in this province and indeed as Dr. Bristow said, in all parts of Canada. Is the Minister going to persist in his stubborn refusal to acknowledge that there is a crisis and to show the kind of leadership necessary to fight our way out of it? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. HON. l. DESJARDINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Leadership is a very important thing.

Some people feel that leadership will be getting up and saying, yes, any time that there's pressure, and other people feel that leadership is trying to remedy quietly, work ing with the boards, not overreacting and only acting when there's pressure without any plan of act ion. I think that 5393

Friday, 6 January, 1984 leadership is probably doing what we're doing with Deer Lodge, and that we're going to construct. They'll be some beds there that will release certain beds. Leadership is the planning that we're doing with the different groups and looking at the priorities. Leadership is taking the responsibility to see what the people of Manitoba want and what they can afford because, after all, they're the ones that decide. Leadership is finding out and having a proper system, following the system of going to your colleagues and trying to make a point for your department.

Leadership is taking into consideration what the deficit might be to see if we can afford these deficits. Leadership is looking to see if the people can suffer a tax increase. Leadership is an awful lot of things. Leadership is not standing up and waving the flag and saying, yes I'll buy that, when there's an awful lot of pressure. Leadership, I think, is more. When there is pressure and say all right, we will not - just because of pressure - say yes to you and maybe at the expense of somebody else; we'll look at the overall thing.

We will not panic, we will do it in an orderly fashion and I'm going to try to give that leadership as I've been doing in the past. Danger to patients in Manitoba MR. L. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, on Monday, July 11, 1983 in this House I brought to the attention of the Minister the fact that the President of MONA, Mrs. Vera Chernecki, had made a public statement to the effect that the danger to patients in hospitals in Manitoba continues unabated, and that the danger has continued to increase as a result of a number of poor staffing situations in hospitals in Manitoba throughout the year.

At that time MONA cited several hundred incident reports filed by nurses in Manitoba hospitals. I asked the Minister of Health whether he could confirm that fact and what he was going to do about it.

He said, Sir, "I have asked the Manitoba Health Services Committee to initiate a review that they are doing a thorough review on a priority basis and, as soon as I get a report, I will share it with the members of this House." In view of the fact, Sir, that that was Monday, July 11, 1983 and this is Friday, January 6, 1984, which is approximately six months later, I now ask the Minister to report to this House on what his Commission and his office and he, himself, has done about that statement and those incident reports filed by Mrs. Chernecki. HON. l. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Speaker, after the preliminary report, and that was announced in the House, I set up a special committee chaired by Justice O'Sullivan, having representation from different groups, suppliers of the delivery of service£ and people on the receiving end and it will be a thorough analysis that will look at the role of the LPN's also. There's a wide scope there and whenever that information is available to me, as has been - (Interjection) - Yes, you were talking about the Commission. My honourable friend talked about months. There's some report that he commissioned that he's never released.

There's some report that he's had, information that he sat on in this House when he was the Minister, he sat on. Can you release the chiropractic report? Can you tell me about the ... 5394 SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, I was asked and I'm supposed to respond and I am responding. Now I am not going to panic or pretend that I'll run every single hospital like the former Minister did; there is a board. I've proven yesterday that we are still making contribution at the top of the western provinces and probably very near the top of any provinces.

I have proven, without a doubt, that we've done a hell of lot better than in the days of my honourable friend have said that at the request of the professionals we went to block funding, and that block funding then leaves the responsibility on the board and we'll go along with that. I'm not going to overreact every time there's somebody that complains because it is a difficult thing - (Interjection) Yes, overreact, overreact, exactly - that's right. A MEMBER: .. . I'd like to see you when you underreact. HON. L. DESJARDINS: That's fine.

Well, underreact I guess would be waving the flag, saying yes, I'm for utilization rates and the next they say no, I don't believe in utilization rate; and then on some day say there are too many beds; the next day say there are not enough beds. That's overreacting and you're a master at it. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Order please. May I remind members we are in question period and perhaps we can have but one question at a time. Order for Return re Jobs Fund MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. Last summer, Mr. Speaker, the First Minister accepted an Order for Return from me, requesting information as to the extent and the cost of the advertising of the Jobs Fund. Is the First Minister prepared to table that information today? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, it will be tabled very shortly. MR. G. MERCIER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that it would appear that the First Minister has refused to give us that information so far and he's had a period of six months to prepare it and table it and it's not available, in view of the fact that it appears that the government has spent, up until September 1st, at least half-a-million dollars and has now embarked on a further lavish, expensive, self-serving advertising program in the media throughout the province, in view of the problem that appears in the health care crisis is one of funding, is the First Minister prepared to cancel

Friday, 6 January, 1984 this lavish, expensive, self-serving advertising program and put the money into the health system, so that perhaps at least one infant in one of the hospitals, or one person requiring heart by-pass surgery, or some other individual in Manitoba better health care, could receive the benefit of money rather than the government using this money for purely political purposes? HON. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, let me first reject any suggestion that the honourable member has made in his usual exaggerated form of suggesting the amount of expenditure in respect to awareness program, in respect to the Jobs Fund, is less than 1 percent of the total, compared to much higher percentages insofar as other kinds of programs, such as, the NEED Program that the Federal Government is responsible, where there is a much larger percentage of funds that are spent.

It was the Honourable Member for Emerson in fact that first, with some justification, criticized the government for not ensuring that members were fully aware of programs, that some Manitobans were aware of our programs and, unfortunate ly, because we weren't getting the information out and the honourable member, I think, was correct. Other members were proceeding without information, that it was an unfair kind of situation insofar as Manitobans were concerned in respect to a particular program under the Jobs Fund that was referred to by the Honourable Member for Emerson.

I recall the criticism very well last session by the Honourable Member for Emerson . Mr. Speaker, on Orders for Return we have not refused, we will be providing that information, and let me tell the honourable member that it will be provided faster than 75 percent of the Orders for Return that were tabled by his administration while he was the House Leader in this House. In fact, I'm not sure, Mr. Speaker, whether we still have the order for return that we sought in respect to the Lord Selkirk that the former Member for St. Johns asked session after session after session without any response.

I can assure honourable members that we'll do a much better job by way of response to the requests for orders of return than indeed was the dismal record of the Member for St. Norbert while he was the House Leader in this Chamber. MR. G. MERCIER: Mr. Speaker, it's obvious that the government does not want to provide the information on an advertising program that it would now appear to be in the range of $2 million, with I percent of the $200 million Jobs Fund, at a time when they're cutting back all institutions in Manitoba. Poll re constitutional proposal A supplementary question, Mr.

Speaker, to the Attorney-General. Last summer the Attorney-General, Mr. Speaker, undertook in response to a question to me, to table in this House a poll which he had requested be done on the acceptability of his, at that time, constitutional proposal and an analysis of that poll, and to inform us as to the cost of doing that poll and the analysis, is the Attorney-General prepared to table that information in the House today? HON. H. PAWLEY: Before the Attorney-General wants to respond because there was a two-part question from the Honourable Member for St. Norbert. - (Interjection) Oh yes, oh yes.

The Honourable Member for St. Norbert was continuing to pose questions in respect to the first question that he had posed to me about advertising. Let me advise the honourable member that his statement about $2 million being expended in respect to the Jobs Fund is just about as far out of range as the statement that the honourable member made last year when he suggested that the wish list was a fantasy land concept. Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member for St.

Norbert continues to live in a fantasy land as he did last year when he made that comment in respect to the Minister of Finance about the Minister of Finance's wish list. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. FI. PENNER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. In response to the question which was asked by the Member for St. Norbert: yes, I am prepared to table that report in the House, either today or Monday at the latest and, at the same time, it will be deposited in the Provincial Library. Economic indicators re Saskatchewan MF!. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Wolseley. MS. M. PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the First Minister. Obviously the Member for Sturgeon Creek asks questions and doesn't want the answers, but he has roused my curiosity. I would like the First Minister to answer that question, and I would also like to know how we compare with Saskatchewan on the other economic indicators other than total manufacturing. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H.

PAWLEY: I'm pleased that the Honourable Member for Wolseley ensured that I had the opportunity to provide response to the question that the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek had invited me to respond to and then changed his mind and didn't want me to respond to just a few moments ago. Mr.

Speaker, I want to first commence my remarks in respect to the question posed by poi'1ting out that insofar as unemployment is concerned December, 1982, compared to December, 1983, the seasonally adjusted rate in Saskatchewan has shown a four-tenths of 1 percent increase in unemployment compared to Manitoba, and I would ask the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek if he'd like to make a note of this for future reference because we ought to be pleased as Manitobans by this figure, a 2.2 percent decrease in unemployment.

The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek might also be interested in noting, if he would also take out his pen and write down these figures as well, that Saskatchewan, Decemb er, 1982 , compared to December 1983, 11,000 more employed seasonally­ adjusted in Saskatchewan less than Manitoba where we have 20,000 more seasonally-adjusted employed in the Province of Manitoba this year than this time last year. Mr. Speaker, this, despite the fact that when we 5395

Friday, 6 January, 1984 assumed government in Manitoba we had to take over a situation in this province that was far from good, a legacy that was far from good, left to us by the previous Conservative administration in the Province of Manitoba in contrast to a legacy that was very favourable left to the Devine Government by the former Blakeney Government in the Province of Saskatchewan, a situation by which there was no deficit and there were fine economic indicators throughout, compared to the dismal economic indicators that we inherited from the previous Conservative Administration in the Province of Manitoba.

Private Capital investment MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since the First Minister is referring to this set of statistics that he laid before the House today and is very proud of them, he earlier made a statement that Manitoba was out-performing the rest of the country in 10 of the 11 indicators that are shown in his report, the 11th being the manufacturing shipments which are much down in Manitoba, I ask him if he thinks that Manitobans should be pleased or take credit for the fact that we have had a greater decrease in private capital investment than the rest of the country as a whole, is that a positive move for Manitoba, that private capital investment has decreased more rapidly than the rest of the country as a whole?

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. H. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'm sure that the Leader of the Opposition will take pleasure as a Manitoban with me in the fact that the Department of Regional Economic Development forecasts a 16 percent increase by way of industrial capital expansion in the next current year 1984, which will be the highest increase forecast to be enjoyed by any single province in Canada. I'm sure the honourable member will take pleasure with me in that forecast. Constitutional resolution MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Mr.

Speaker, we prefer to place our trust in reality and what's happened, not what's projected. My question is for the Honourable Government House Leader, Mr. Speaker, not for the Minister of Finance. In the opinion of Mr. Kerr Twaddle that was tabled yesterday in the House, there is reference to an opinion which he gave the government on August 17, 1983, I wonder if the Government House Leader would consider tabling that as well, so we may have a comparative basis for understanding the moves that have been made with respect to the constitutional resolution. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON.

A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, the opinion provided in August 17, 1983 relates to wording which will, in the context of the amendment I proposed yesterday, no longer be before the House and is not before the House at the present time. However, if the honourable member feels that it is essential to his understanding of the question, and I appreciate his desire to understand the amendment and the original question, I will certainly review that opinion. If it is in the interests of a better understanding of this whole question, I will be happy to provide it to the honourable member. Submissions re Bill 115 MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, and ask him whether he can confirm that the public will have an opportunity to make public submissions, both written and oral, to the Legislature on Bill 115? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, so far I've had difficulty even introducing Bill 115 into the House. I think, at this point, that's a hypothetical question. MR. R. DOERN: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister if he would provide me with a straight answer instead of a fancy one, whether the public of Manitoba will have an opportunity to appear before Law Amendments, or any other committee, on the two pieces of legislation. First of all, I should say the resolution, the recycled constitutional amendment; and secondly, to Bill 115. In view of the fact that the Minister has publicly stated that this is an entirely new proposal will he give them another chance, or a new chance, to respond to a new proposal? HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Speaker, clearly all bills moved in the House go through first reading, second reading, committee stage and third reading. It is clearly our intention to follow the normal legislative process. I am surprised though, Mr. Speaker, that the member would not be familiar with the legislative process since he certainly has many years more experience in this Chamber than I do. Part of that experience was his support in 1980 for a bill bearing the same title which was not referred, which I find rather interesting, to a standing committee at that time. A MEMBER: Did he ask for it to be referred? HON. A.

ANSTETT: Well, there were no public submissions on that. A MEMBER: It went through Law Amendments. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, it would certainly be our intention to follow the normal legislative process and to provide for whatever hearings and consideration 5396

clause by clause on Bill 115 are required by the normal legislative process. We certainly have no objections to that. MR. R. DOERN: Mr. Speaker, I will repeat the second part of that question which was not addressed. I asked the Minister whether the public will have an opportunity to also make submissions.

I ask the Minister - I'm quite familiar with the legislative process - I also ask the Minister, for the purpose of letting the public know that they will have an opportunity to make submissions on the bill, but I also ask the Minister, and he did not reply, whether the public would have an opportunity to make submissions in regard to the resolution and in regard to this recycled constitutional amendment. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, the member has advised the House that he is familiar with the legislative process.

I know of no example, unless he can provide one, where a committee, by referral resolution of the Assembly or after a bill has received second reading in the Assembly, has gone out and held public hearings. The government and opposition often have brought in amendments in a bill during clause-by-clause consideration or on a resolution after public hearings have brought in changes, and have then, after the whole legislative process has taken place, go out again and hold additional public hearings. That's a preposterous suggestion, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, we are not prepared to engage in that kind of charade which is being recommended by the Member for Elmwood. MR. R. DOERN: Sc, Mr. Speaker, the answer to that is, no. I would then ask the Minister whether the government will be spending any public funds in an attempt, however desperate, to sell its program of official bilingualism to the general public in the form of pamphlets or newspaper advertisements or anything else. Does he have a budget and an intention and a program to take taxpayers' funds to sell this recycled program? HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Speaker, unfortunately I really wish I did have a budget, an intention and a program to deal with some of the misrepresentations that have been coming from the Member for Elmwood with regard to the resolution and to the bill. However, Mr. Speaker, I have no such budget; I have no such intention; and I have no such program. If the Member for Elmwood, however, feels that the people of Manitoba would benefit from such a program I would be happy to consider his recommendation that I ask Treasury Board for the funds and ask my staff to develop such a program. Mr.

Speaker, I think what's important here is that the Member for Elmwood does recognize the proposal that was tabled in the House yesterday as a very new proposal to deal with a very important subject matter. Mr. Speaker, I'm glad he does. I only wish, Mr.

Speaker, that he would give the same kind of favorable and enlightened evaluation to it he was prepared to give to a proposal made by members opposite in 1980 when he said in the Legislature: "I believe, and I'm sure most members in the House, if not all, would agree that this should be at federal expense; that the Provincial Government in my judgment should not have any sizable financial obligation because of the fact that it is a federal requirement and that we are a key province in Canadian Confederation, and it's basically because we are a province in a Confederation that we meet this requirement." Mr.

Speaker, we are talking about dollars. We are talking about commitments and expenditures. I think the Member for Elmwood would be wise to consider, as well, his own remarks on this question in previous years. I'm glad to see, Mr. Speaker, as well, that one of the members opposite has finally broken his silence. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY ADJOURNED DEBATE ON RESOLUTION CONSTITUTIONAL AM ENDMENT RE: OFFICIAL LANGUAGES MR. SPEAKER: Would the Government House Leader so indicate? HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Speaker, would you please call the resolution standing in the name of the Honourable Leader of the Opposition at the top of Page 2. MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed resolution of the Honourable Attorney-General and the amendment thereto moved by the Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs, the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. G. FILMON: Stand, Mr. Speaker. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Stand. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have leave to have the matter stand? Order please.

The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. A point of order? HON. A. MACKllNG: No, Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak to the resolution. If the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is not prepared to speak today, I certainly would like to address some remarks to the resolution. MR. SPEAKER: If that is the pleasure of the House to have the matter stand in the name of the Leader of the Opposition - the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I have the satisfaction of having an opportunity to make some contribution to the debate on this resolution not 5397 Friday, 6 January, 1984

Friday, 6 January, 1984 knowing the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition. In anticipation of them I must confess that I have some regret that he wasn't in a position to speak today. However, that gives me an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, in the words of some members and I hope that this will become a majority of the members, the words of the Ho nourable Member for Fort Garry, that it's time that there be some reason. The Ho nourable Member for Fort Garry used the adjective "sweet reason." Well, to my way of thinking reasons should always be sweet.

I don't see the necessity for the adjective, but it's on the basis of reason that we're before this House at all, Mr. Speaker, on the question of French Language services. What is reasonable? Why are we here? I suggest the official opposition has to address that question. They haven't done thus far, Mr. Speaker. I have heard in the media a suggestion that our government has brought this issue into the Legislature. Well, Mr. Speaker, it wasn't the previous administration of the Honourable Member for Charleswood that brought the issue before the Legislature in 1980?

They were constrained to deal with the longstanding issue of what was right for French-speaking people in Manitoba. They were constrained by the course of legal action to bring matters back before the Legislature, matters that had been so badly misconstrued, so badly twisted by previous actions in this Legislature that we owe it as a Legislature to deal with this question in a reasonable way. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is no question that we must face up to the fact that there is an outstanding claim, a claim that has received the validation of the highest court in the province, not simply on one occasion.

We know that court is feisty in its approach to the protection of linguistic rights in Canada, so the expections not just in Manitoba but in every part of Canada are that language rights, cultural rights, are going to receive vigorous protection by the highest court in the land. That is fact. That is sweet, if you want to use the adjective, sweet reasonable fact. We shouldn't be upset about a court that is concerned about protecting rights in Canada. We should be glad that we have a court that's co ncerned, that the multicultural base, the multilinguistic base that we have is alive and healthy.

That's a very good healthy thing, Mr. Speaker, that we are not forced into one linguistic mold. We're not being forced into one cultural mold; we are not a melting pot. We demonstrate to the world in Canada the benefits of multiculturalism; that people of different ethnic cultural linguistic backgrounds can work together in harmony, in peace; that we can develop programs, social programs, economic programs that are an example to the world, an example of, for example, of our medical and hospital comprehensive care.

We are an example to the people of the United States where they have a different theory about linguistic and cultural rights. They believe in a melting-pot theory. We believe in protecting and enshrining cultural and linguistic rights because it's a positive thing in society, Mr. Speaker. So it is that I welcome an opportunity to respond to the concerns that Manitobans have that we stop the negative acidic debate in the Legislature on linguistic rights; that we look at the issue in a positive constructive sense. Surely that is possible.

Surely that was the atmosphere in 1980 when the Member for Elmwood said those very positive things, and he did say positive things about language rights in Manitoba. Surely that was the spirit and the concern of the former Leader of the Opposition, now the Member for Charleswood, when he said in this House during the course of this debate that he is not opposed to the advancement of the linguistic rights of French­ Canadian people living in Manitoba. He had a concern about the narrow legal problem that he foresaw in respect to those proposals, and I'll deal with that somewhat later.

But let us quite frankly acknowledge that there is a problem; there is an issue to be faced. It won't go away. If it isn't Mr. Bilodeau, it'll be someone else, and that we, as a Legislature, are constrained to do something and do something constructive and reasonable about the recognition of those rights and the guarantee of those rights. So that is why we're here. Let no one continue to say that this issue was dragged into the Legislature, that we marched into the Legislature with this issue. This issue is here because of decisions made in this Legislature back long before our time. It is time, Mr.

Speaker, for a fair and a reasonable approach to the problems we face. Now, what we strive for is to provide an atmosphere in Manitoba where people of different linguistic and cultural backgrounds will be proud of those backgrounds, will acknowledge the need for unity within Canada on programs, but will have a continuing pride in the difference that exists within people. We are all different in this Chamber. There is so much variety and difference in nature and that's what makes human nature beautiful is the difference.

Can you co nsider what society would be like if we all like that little automaton that one of the candidates in this last provincial leadership campaign had, if they were all little . . . ? MR. F. JOHNSTON: Not like you. HON. A. MACKLING: Well, the Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek says if they're all like me. Heaven forbid. I don't aspire that everyone should be like me. I'm glad that there are people like the member for Sturgeon Creek that are concerned, express their views in a vigorous way and I hope in a reasonable way on this issue and others. Mr.

Speaker, what we have hoped to do, what we have striven for, is to come up with a formula that will stop the references to the Supreme Court, stop the costly needless anguish through court processes over this issue, and that is a reasonable, responsible approach by government; not to say we're going to sit back and let the courts decide, because the courts again will turn to us as this Legislature under the former Premier, Mr. Lyon, had to come back to this Legislature.

Now, knowing that that ongoing problem exists, isn't it responsible, isn't it reasonable that this Legislature face up to the task of dealing with the issue in a reasonable way? I suggest it is. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that there are concerns, valid concerns. The present Leader of the Opposition is concerned about costs and that's a reasonable concern, 5398

Friday, 6 January, 1984 but are costs that much of an issue? Are costs that much of an issue? And I address remarks to the Leader of the Opposition, and I hope he listens to me, are costs a reasonable issue? You know, in the formula that we have advocated, there is a reduction of costs, a reduction of the needless expense of translating a great many statutes that need not be translated. So there is an actual saving in costs, a saving from costs that we think are totally unnecessary, so that's a reasonable approach. What did the previous Leader of the Opposition have to say about costs?

Well, he had a view that costs were not all that critical and I have a reference here as to - I've got more material here now than I started with - but in his reference Mr. Lyon had this to say and this was on July 12, 1983. The Member for Charleswood in this House was talking about the question of costs and he says, "Mr. Speaker, you've never" - it says "you've ever" but I think it means "never." "You've never heard anyone on this side of the House talk about cost.

I don't think you heard me talk about cost in 1979-80 when the Forest case came down and I said that the rule of law was that we had to obey the Supreme Court of Canada and to engage in those translation services that were necessary to reimplement

Section 23. You don't talk about costs unless you're so shallow in your thinking, Mr. Speaker, that you don't understand what the country is made of. You don't talk about cost in a murder case. There is a principle involved. You pursue the case through to the end." - (Interjection) - Now, Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is interjecting.

I think this was excellent advice from the former Leader of the Opposition, a man who had some experience in constitutional matters, and on this constitutional matter he said, unequivocally, that no one on that side of the House was concerned, were issuing, were arguing on the question that it was going to cost Manitobans something more to provide more effective, more reasonable linguistic services. Now, that was the purport of what the Honourab le Member for Charleswood said as recently as July, 1983, and I take his word for that, Mr. Speaker, that costs should not be an issue.

If there are rights and benefits that can fall from those rights, then the costs should not be considered; and the costs, when we look at them, are not significant. So I say to the present Leader of the Opposition, please, please have a look at that question because it's not a formidable problem. The costs are not a formidable problem. Now, Mr. Speaker, we're here now after a long Session earlier on - I should say in the previous year - and we're here with what we consider to be a fresh approach.

There's a provision for a bill, a statute that will demonstrate to the people of Manitoba that we believe in the protection of linguistic rights. There is a resolution which is outlined and provides a shelter for French-speaking people in Manitoba that will ensure that an 1890 statute will not occur again, or a 1916 statute which wiped out private schools. MR. D. SCOTT: 1916. HON. A. MACKLING: 1916, I said 1916 - the Member for lnkster wants to be helpful , thank you - so that there will be a protection of those rights entrenched in our Constitution, a fundamental entrenc hment of rights, a sheltering.

But we have striven and we've said from the outset that we're not trying to enlarge rights - we said that from Day One, Mr. Speaker - and the former Leader of the Opposition was concerned about that. That's a valid concern, a valid concern that we not be enlarging rights beyond what they are. That's his valid concern and I don't quarrel with it and he was very concerned about the legal opinions and the legal niceties and this is a problem in my accepting his approach to this, because rather than looking at it from the point of view of cultural benefit for Manitoba.

He then started to focus on a narrow legalistic approach. But let's look at the narrow legalistic approach. We now have the opinion of Mr. Twaddle who is a long time constitutional professional who has indicated, in this opinion, that he regards as a remote possibility an expansion of rights in the amendments that we are proposing. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I suggest to the honourable member, the Leader of the Opposition, that if he asks for any legal opinion on any subject that he desires from any lawyer in Manitoba, from any court in the land, that to get a reference and opinion that something is a remote possibility is about as strong a professional statement as can be obtained. I want him to consider that, Mr. Speaker, because it is not a reference saying well that there's a possibility, there is some likelihood, it could always happen. It's a remote possibility.

I know it's a remote possibility that I will be struck down while leaving the Legislative Building when I go out to leave some time later on today but there is that possibility. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: I hope not, Al. HON. A. MACKLING: Honourable members are saying they hope not and I appreciate that because no one wants to see anyone suffer. I trust that they will recognize the significance of that opinion that it is a remote possibility. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to read from the excellent editorial that the Free Press published today.

I think that I commend its reading though to the Leader of the Opposition, and ot her members of his side of the House, because what it highlights is a �oncern about remoteness, about remote possibilities. There are remote possibilities but we shouldn't be governed by remote possibilities.

We have to govern our actions on reasonable likelihood, and what we're suggesting, in advancing these amendments, is that there will be a reasonable likelihood of settlement of longstanding differences; a reasonable likelihood that this will not cost Manitobans a significant amount of money; a reasonable likelihood that we will have a richer, better society for it. Now that is the reasonable possibility, it's not a remote possibility. I suggest it's a real possibility, Mr. Speaker.

Now, what we have brought forward is not as a result of some wishful thinking on our part, not a desire to create an issue, a concern to find a reasonable response. We have listened, Mr. Speaker, we have listed to the people of Manitoba and we have responded. Mr. Speaker, I question whether honourable members 5399

Friday, 6 January, 1984 opposite have been listening and responding to the best interests of Manitoba, or whether they have been listening and responding to the narrow partisan attitudes that do exist on the part of some people. Mr. Speaker, the official opposition now - (Interjection) Mr. Speaker, I refuse to get concerned about the continued interjection of the Member for Pembina because we're somewhat used to that chatter and it does not dissuade us from logic on this side of the House. So, Mr.

Speaker, let me reiterate that we have demonstrated our concerns to listen to what was said by people of Manitoba, to rethink and try to ensure that what we have fashioned is both reasonable, logical, fair and acceptable, not only to us but to all of the people of Manitoba, and to the members of the official opposition, because we took into concern all of the voices, all of the concerns that were evidenced. We believe that this is a fair and reasonable solution to this age-old problem.

Now it is time for the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues to consider being positive about this question, demonstrating leadership, demonstrating reasonable concern with an issue that will not go away, to demonstrate that they can move from obstruction - because it was obstruction under a previous Conservative Leader - move from obstruction to construction. The Leader of the Opposition and his colleages now have an opportunity. He has a weekend of reflection to consider how they can become positive and assist this government because it's not just an NOP Government problem.

It's a problem that was there for the former Premier, Mr. Lyon, in 1980, it continues to be a problem. The people of Manitoba look not only to ... MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER, R Eyler: Order please, order please. Are the members ready to proceed? The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. A. MACKLING: Mr. Speaker, I know it's difficult.

It's difficult for honourable members to put aside partisan vitriolic from time to time but it is necessary to consider the people of Manitoba, the future of Manitoba, not in a narrow partisan way but in a way that demonstrates political responsibility of the finest sort where people are prepared to accept that there are problems and face up to them. There is an opportunity now for the Leader of the Opposition to demonstrate, under his leadership, a concern to leave the past behind; there is an opportunity, Mr.

Speaker, for the Leader of the 5400 Opposition to demonstrate that under his leadership an official opposition party will do what an official opposition party is capable of, and that is advancing in a constructive way suggestions, ideas, proposals to ensure that the decisions that are made are a consensual decision which will receive the endorsement and the approval of all of the people of Manitoba. That is open, Mr.

Speaker, to the Leader of the Opposition at this time, and I trust that he will consider that opportunity because, not only his political fate, but a good deal of the political fate of his party will hinge upon the rightness of his decision. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? Is the House prepared to al low the amendment resolution to stand in the name of the Leader of the Opposition? (Agreed) Agreed and so ordered. The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr. Speaker, there being no further business before the House this morning . . .

I believe the Minister of Agriculture wishes to speak. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. NO N-POLIT ICAL STATEMENT HON. B. URUSKI: Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a short non-political statement, if I could. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (Ukrainian spoken) (Translation) From all of us on this side, from our Premier and his family, and all of us in this Assembly, we wish all people in the world, all Canadians, and our people in Manitoba a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Christ is born! MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. A. ANSTETT: Mr.

Speaker, I think all honourable members would join in wishing the Minister of Agriculture reciprocally a Merry Christmas, and certain other members on this side and perhaps on the other side. Mr. Speaker, I would then move, seconded by the Minister of Health, that this House do now adjourn. MOTION presented and carried and the House adjourned and stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on Monday.