Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 5 (30th Legislature, 1st Session)

30-1-5

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable Peter Fox Vol. XXI No. 5 8:00p.m., Tuesday, February 5th, 1974. First Session, 30th Legislature. Printed by R. S. Evans- Queen's Printer for Province of Manitoba

Electoral Division Name Political Address Postal Affiliation Code ARTHUR J. Douglas Watt P.C. Reston, Man. ROM 1XO ASSINIBOIA Steve Patrick Lib. 10 Red Robin PI., Winnipeg R3J 3La Bl RTLE-RUSSELL Harry E. Graham P.C. Binscarth, Man. ROJ OGO BRANDON EAST Hon. Leonard S. Evans NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova BRAN DON WEST Edward McGill P.C. 222a Princess Ave., Brandon R7B OH9 BURROWS Hon.

Ben Hanuschak NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova CHARLESWOOD Arthur Moug P.C. 29 Willow Ridge Rd., Winnipeg R3R 1L5 CHURCHILL Les Osland NDP 66 Radisson Blvd., Churchill ROB OEO CRESCENTWOOD Harvey Patterson NDP 978 Garwood Ave., Winnipeg R3M 1N7 DAUPHIN Hon. Peter Burtniak NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova ELMWOOD Hon. R ussell J. Doern NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova EMERSON Steve Derewianchuk NDP V ita, Manitoba ROA 2KO FLIN FLON Thomas Barrow NDP Cranberry Portage, Man. ROB OHO FORT GARRY L.R. (Bud) Sherman P.C. 86 Niagara St., Winnipeg R3N OT9 FORT ROUGE Lloyd Axworthy Lib. 132 Osborne St.

S., Winnipeg R3L 1Y5 GIMLI John C. Gottfried NDP 44- 3rd Ave., Gimli, Man. ROC 1BO GLADSTONE James R. Ferguson P.C. Gladstone, Man. ROJ OTO INKSTER Hon. Sidney Green, Q.C. NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova KILDONAN Hon. Peter Fox NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova LAC DU BONNET Hon. Sam Uskiw NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova LAKESIDE Harry J. Enns P.C. Woodlands, Man. ROC 3HO LA VERENDRYE Bob Banman P.C. Steinbach, Man. ROA 2AO LOGAN William Jenkins NDP 12 94 Erin St., Winnipeg R3E 2S6 MINNEDOSA David Blake P.C. Minnedosa, Man. ROJ 1EO MORRIS Warner H. Jorgenson P.C. Morris, Man.

ROG 1KO OSBORNE Hon. I an Turnbull NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova PEMBINA George Henderson P.C. Manitou, Man. ROG 1GO POINT DOUGLAS Donald Malinowski NDP 23 Coral berry Ave., Winnipeg R2V 2P2 PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE Gordon E. Johnston Lib. 135- 16th St. S.W., Portage la Prairie, Man. R1N 2W5 RADISSON Harry Shafransky NDP 4 Maplehurst Rd., Winnipeg R2J 1Wa RHINE LAND Arnold Brown P.C. Winkler, Man. ROG 2XO RI EL Donald W. Craik P.C. 3 River Lane, Winnipeg R2M 3YB RIVER HEIGHTS Sidney Spivak, Q.C. P.C. Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova ROBLIN J. Wally McKenzie P.C. lnglis, Man. ROJ OXO ROCK LAKE Henry J.

Einarson P.C. Glenboro, Man. ROK OXO ROSSMERE Hon. Ed. Schreyer NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova RUPERTSLAND Harvey Bostrom NDP Manigotagan, Manitoba ROE 1EO ST. BONIFACE J. Paul Marion Lib. 394 Gaboury Place, Winnipeg R2H OL4 ST. GEORGE Hon. Bill Uruski NDP 10th fir., 330 Portage Ave.,Wpg. R3C OC4 ST. JAMES George M inaker P.C. 318 Ronald St., Winnipeg R3J 3JB ST. JOHNS Hon. Saul Cherniack, O.C. NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova ST. MATTHEWS Wally Johannson NDP 41a Home St., Winnipeg R3G 1X4 ST. VITAL D.J. Walding NDP 26 Hemlock Place, Winnipeg R2H 1L7 STE. ROSE A.R. (Pete) Adam NDP Ste.

Rose du Lac, Man. ROL 1SO SELKIRK Hon. Howard Pawley NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova SEVEN OAKS Hon. Saul A. Miller NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova SOURIS KILLARNEY Earl McKellar P.C. Nesbitt, Man. ROK 1PO SPRINGFIELD Hon. Rene E. Toupin NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova STURGEON CREEK J. Frank Johnston P.C. 310 Overdale St., Winnipeg R3J 2G3 SWAN RIVER James H. Bilton P.C. Swan River, Man. ROL 1ZO THE PAS Hon. Ron McBryde NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova THOMPSON Ken Dillen NDP 1171 Westwood Or., Thompson RBN OGB TRANSCONA Hon.

Russell Paulley NDP Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3c ova VIR DEN Morris McGregor 'P.C. Kenton, Man. ROM OZO WELLINGTON Philip M. Petursson NDP 681 Banning St., Winnipeg R3G 2G3 WINNIPEG CENTRE J.R. (Bud) Boyce NOP 777 Winnipeg Ave., Winnipeg R3E OR5 WOLSELEY I.H. Asper Lib. Legislative Bldg., Winnipeg R3C ova

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8: 00 o'clock, Tuesday, February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. 87 MR. A. R. (Pete) ADAM (Ste. Rose): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I believe it's customary to extend our congratulations to you for having been appointed to the office of Speaker of the Hom·e again for this 30th Session. I know that you shall carry out your duties, as you have in the past, efficiently and I, for one, will do all I can to assist you in keeping the decorum of our Assembly here.

I would like to also congratulate my two colleagues, the two members, the Member for Rupertsland who was the mover of the Throne Speech, the seconder, the Member for Crescentwood. I believe that these two gentlemen will certainly contribute to deliberations here at this session and for the sessions that we will be going into in the future, in the years ahead. I would like at this time, Mr.

Speaker, to thank the people of my constituency for having given me the honour of electing me again to represent them for another term of office, and I'm very pleased and it's gratifying to know that they have placed this confidence in me and I certainly want to thank them publicly now for their confidence and I will certainly try to live up to their trust.

It seems to me at this particular time the election fever has died down, we are now enter ing our first session of the 30th Legislature, and I think it's a good time perhaps if we sit back and take stock of ourselves - that• s what I like to do anyway - and see where we stand at this particular time.

And I for one would like to perhaps look into the results of the first, the 1969 election, and I would be perhaps the first one to concede that perhaps the results of the election in 1969 was not so much that the people of Manitoba wanted to elect a New Democratic govern ment but rather it was a rejection, a rejection by the people for the government that was then in office, the Conservative government of the day. I think that during the past four years, and then we come up to the .election of 1973, and I think this is a different story altogether.

We go into the 1973 election and I believe that it is no longer a rejection of the opposition, I think it's the results of the four years in office of the new administration, new ideas. Maybe the opposi tion won't agree that they're all good but I think that most of the programs that have been intro duced and passed in the last four years have been of benefit to the people of Manitoba as a whole, at least to the greatest number of people, in my opinion, and I believe that the people in 1969 could not see an alternative in the Liberal Party and that is why I think they voted for the New Democratic Party in 1969.

As we look at the results of the election of 1973, we find that while we have not elected that many more members to the House, we find that the popular vote has increased from approximately 39 percent in '69 to something like 44 percent in 1973, which in my opinion is quite impressive and in fact I believe perhaps not the highest percentage in history, but the second largest at least in the history of Manitoba that any government received that high of a percentage of the popular vote, with the exception of the Duff Roblin government. --(Interjection)- Now we'll give them credit, Sir, because I think that, in all fairness I believe that Premier Roblin came in with the reformist policies at that time, and I think the people of Manitoba do like reform, and they did vote for Duff Roblin, and I think in a sense the people do like reform in the Province of Manitoba, but certainly they did not find an alternative in the Liberal Party and they certainly showed that again in this election in 1973.

They are satisfied with what we have done in the past four years. I was very pleased with the results in my constituency - one of the highest percentages, I believe, over 45 percent, an increase from 39 percent. --(Inter jection)-- Well I have to give credit to my colleague the Minister of Finance because l' m sure that he had a lot to do with increasing the percentage in my constituency with his tax reform. I thanked him for that.

Yes, I• m quite satisfied that the Minister of Finance had a lot to do with the increase of the percentage of the popular vote for the New Democratic government this time in 1973. --(Interjection)-- Well, in spite of the wheeling and dealing that we witnessed during the campaign, the nice wheeling and dealing, the deals that were made on top of the table and under the table by the two parties, by the opposition, it's all history now. --(Interjection)-- Oh, there might have been some--it was sure notorious anyway, the dealing that was going on and of course they didn't have much success.

Wherever they ran, they were not too successful where they ran only one candidate in opposition to the New Democratic Party.

88 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. ADAM Cont'

d) There was also another outfit they called the GGG - GGG, I wonder what that stands for anyway now, you know. I believe that covertly they were supported by both parties in the Opposition, the GGG--covertly I said, covertly. You know, that reminds me, GGG, it reminds me of another organization, KKK. Does anybody know what KKK is? Well I think that GGG is the Gu Glux Glan. I've got you going now, eh? The Member for Lakeside is starting to cackle again from his seat so I know I'm getting to him already, Mr. Speaker. I hope he can contain himself for awhile until I'm finished my small contribution.

In any event, Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased with the results in Ste. Rose and the results in Manitoba as a whole, and it just indicates the foresight and the enlightenment of the Manitoba people in 1973. Well I know it's quite significant in the results of the 1973 election, you know. It certain ly put to wrong the gloom and doom predictors, the .predictors of doom and gloom, and some of them are sitting there and some of them are out. The Leader of the Opposition was one of the most vocal, vociferous spokesmen for the gloom and doom boys.

In fact in 197 3 I believe somebody made a statement that this would be the last free election in Manitoba if the New Democratics won this election. What happened to all the predictions? Manitoba's economy is going to decline. 28 Liberals to be elected. Where's all the prediction gone? Up in smoke, that's where it is. I believe that the opposition would be wise to pay heed, pay heed to what the people of this province want. They should pay heed and perhaps adjust themselves in the right direction. "Socialism", they were crying. A MEMBER: Who said so? MR. ADAM: Oh, the opposition, they were ...

Socialism, a continual ranting of social ism and so on. Freedom of choice, freedom of choice, freedom of choice-for whom, yes? For whom? Freedom of choice. Well, it's funny you know. I hear people talk on the other side about freedom of choice and now I know that some of the fellows are going to--many of the mem bers on that side are going to support a compulsory checkoff on beef, Yes, compulsory. Com pulsory. And I want to emphasize the word "compulsory", because it's going to be compulsory. Freedom of choice - compulsory. I want them to know that they have two sets of values, they have two sets of values.

Quite a few of them, the Member for Birtle-Russell, the Member for Gladstone. I doubt, I believe the people of Manitoba will not accept as valid the scare tactics that have been forthcoming. I believe that . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order. The Honourable Member for Gladstone. MR. JAMES R. FERGUSON (Gladstone): On a point of privilege, I'd like the Honourable Member for Ste. Rose to clarify himself on the two-faced bit, would he please? MR. ADAM: Would you mind repeating that? I didn't catch that. MR. FERGUSON: Mr. Speaker, I'll speak more slowly. He can possibly get his hearing aid in.

I would like him to clarify the two-faced thing that he att ributed to me. MR. ADAM: I said that the people, the opposition, some of the members had two sets of values. One, they say that they want freedom of choice, but on the other hand they want a com pulsory checkoff. That's two sets - that's two values, Sir. I never said two-faced, you're wrong. Maybe I should have said it. Maybe I should have said it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside have a point of order? MR. HARRY J.

ENNS (Lakeside): Well, it's really not all that important but let the record show that at no time, no members of this party at any time stood for compulsory checkoff. There was always a voluntary provision written into any proposal that enabled . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. ADAM: Well thank you, Mr. Speaker, now that the interruptions are dying down and the major points, so I will continue.

I think I should move, perhaps, to I believe one of the most important things facing the people of Manitoba, not only Manitoba but Canada as a whole, and it has been much in the news lately, and that is the development of our resources. And I would like to particularly apply myself and my remarks to the development of energy, oil energy re sources, fossil fuels and so on.

I think that much has been in the news lat ely in this direction and I'm sure members in the Opposition and I believe certainly the leaders of the Opposition have made note of this, that people are concerned of what's happening; it's just come to fore now. We did not realize that perhaps even as late as last year the seriousness of the problem that now faces not only this country but perhaps the whole world, and in a sense we can be gratified that perhaps the Arab countries did take the stand that they did to make us come to

February 5, 1974 89 THRONE SPEECH (MR. ADAM cont'd) . . . . . our senses and realize that we certainly can't continue to do as we have in the past, and I believe that people of this province are prepared to have public involvement in the development of our natural resources, particularly our non-renewable re sources. And I certainly view this with the highest of priorities, and as I said, particularly the production and the development of our oil resources. The very nature of development of our oil energy resources by the private industry neces sitates that they deplete these resources as fast as they can.

They have to pump out as much as they can, sell it as fast as they can and export it as fast as they can for as high as they can, obtain the highest price they can and produce it at the lowest cost, and it's only natural and you can't blame them for that. You certainly can't blame them.

But it is not in the best interest, it is not in the best interest of our country that we should in this generation deplete all our reserves, and particularly I have to say that I believe that the way that we are depleting our resources now, our oil resources, that we should at all costs and as soon as possible phase out all exports of oil. We have to; we do not have any choice; because I can tell you that in five years' time the oil that we are now selling at a low cost we• re going to have to pay double the price to get it back or even an alternative form of energy is going to cost considerably more.

So I say it's just foolishness to sell, deplete our resources completely, without regard, extra vagantly, and I say that if the people of this country of ours want to have fuel to produce foods, and certainly the farmers of our country must have fuel to produce food, well you better start thinking about it and you better start doing something about it, because if we continue on the present path we are going to run out. I don't know how we can run our farms.

I'm sure there are many farmers on the opposite side and I'm sure they will all agree with me that farms don't run very well.without oil or gas, and unless we can develop new tech niques to find alternate forms of energy to operate our farm equipment, there's going to be starvation in this country. People will have to go back to the land. I have horses, Sir. The Honourable Member for Swan River says we'll go back to horses. Well, I can tell you that I'm prepared. I've never sold my horses; I still have them. --(Interjecti on)-- And it might be a good thing.

I say perhaps--Pm sure the Member for Rock Lake is supporting me on my remarks now. I'm sure he realizes it is correct. You may be very glad to have a horse in ten years from now, I'm sure. I, for one, am certainly very concerned about this and I believe that we should. We're going to have no choice but to change our life style. We just cannot go on depleting, using gas as if it's inexhaustible. I think it's just--well, I would like to, I am sure I wouldn't object if they put us on a ration. Not at all. I wouldn't object to that at all. think we have to set our priorities.

I would be very glad if they would start putting me on a ration, and I would like to see a lot of other people on the ration too in the same way. In any event, the only way that you will change this is by public involvement. We can't blame, as I mentioned awhile ago, you can't blame private industry for pumping out all the oil they can and selling it as fast as they can, export it for whatever they can get, whatever the market will bear, you can't blame them for that, but I can't see how we can start conserving. If you want to conserve your oil, you certainly have to change something.

You can't have the same set-up you have now. We have to have a national policy on oil, energy, on the distribu tion and on the production as well. What we have now we perhaps have enough for Canadians for the next ten or fifteen years, but we'd better start taking a serious look at this. I do not believe that this generation has the moral right to deplete the bounty that this world affords us. I do not believe that this generation has the right to develop the tar sands, for instance, just because we want to develop them as fas as we can, that we are afraid we' re going to have no gas for next week or something.

No way. Our children are entitled to the bounty of this earth the same as we are, and what we have been doing is recklessly depleting our natural resources as if they were inexhaustible. In regard to hydro-electric power, we are very fortunate that we are endowed with a lot of hydro power and I think we should take advantage of this. We should as soon as possible con vert our homes to electric heating and every gallon that we can save on fuel will extend the day that much longer when we will run out.

The Honourable Leader of the Opposition in his remarks, I listened with great interest and I am not going to go into too great depth into his remarks, but one of the remarks he made, which is a perennial remark and perhaps more than perennial, certainly annual anyway, but he makes these remarks several times a year, and that is that Manitoba is the highest taxed

90 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. ADAM cont'd) ... province in Canada. We have heard that time and time again and 1 don't think the facts bear out these statements at all, because I am looking for instance here on some of the per capita comparisons of estimates for 1972-73 provincial and municipal revenues from taxes and licenses and fees, excluding the Maritimes -I don't have the figures for the Maritimes here. We note that Quebec, the provincial levies per capita was $551. 00 and the municipal levies per capita was $183. 00 for a total of $734. 00.

Ontario before the 7% sales tax was $500. 00 for provincial levies and $187. 00 for muni cipal levies, for a total of $68 7. 00. Manitoba, the provincial levies were $411. 00, the municipal levies were $140. 00, for a total of $551. 00. Saskatchewan, another socialist province, according to the members opposite $345. 00 was the provincial levy and $165. 00 was the municipal levy, for a total of $510. 00. Alberta, another Conservative government there, $502. 00 was the provincial levy and $168. 00 was the municipal levy, for a total of $670. 00 per capita.

British Columbia was $486. 00 provincial and $163. 00 municipal, for a total of $649. 00. So you will note by those figures that the two socialist provinces are the lowest per capita levied people in the provinces that I have listed here, so you know the facts just don't bear out the statements that the Leader of the Opposition is trying to make, statements that we have heard time and time again and they just don't ring true when you start bringing out the facts. I am not going to go into, Mr. Speaker, into the income tax here. We can also come up with some startling figures.

But I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition is very well able to get these figures; he knows all he has to do is look at them. So I say that we are not--the Honourable Leader of the Opposition says that we are the highest taxed province in Canada and I say that's false. It's not true. It's simply not true, and all you have to do is go and look at your statistics and you will find out and--I know that you are a person of higher learning and higher education, I am sure that you can find the facts if you so desire.

I want to say a few words about the Throne Speech and I am sure that many people in my constituency will certainly benefit from some of the things that have been announced in the Throne Speech. It's not as barren and a wasteland or desertland of barren wasteland or some thing that the Leader of the Liberal Party--you know, it's kind of humorous to hear the Leader of the Liberal Party make statements like that, that it's a barren wasteland. You know, I recall in the last election in June that we saw these big signs all over the city which said, "Stop, Look and Listen".

You know, I can just surmise what would have happened if he would have had the opportunity. --(Interjection)-- Yeah we have it right here. We can get--it's all here, and I can just imagine, I can just imagine what would happen if he had been fortunate enough to form the government of the day, you know. "Stop, Look and Listen". I did notice, however, that the signs came down about, oh maybe a few days before the election got underway, because I think there was a backlash on those signs. I don't know just what it was but--(lnterjection)-- 1 guess the candidates.

Well, I don't know what the cause was but the signs sure came down in a hurry. We have all the facts here anyway. Many of the programs announced in the Throne Speech will certainly be of benefit to my constituents. For instance, the assistance to small firms and the encouraging of regional dis tribution; I think that many of the assistance for management improvement programs for small business I think is a good thing. Many businessmen have taken advantage of this program last year and I'm sure that many more will take advantage of these programs again this year.

Of course, I come from an agricultural constituency and the farm diversification program has been very beneficial for my constituency. Many farmers have diversified into livestock. Several people have taken advantage of the grants on livestock. In fact, I think last year there were 32, or 132 farmers took advantage of these loans and grants to expand into livestock which is an asset to our province and accounts for some of the higher revenue. In fact, the highest revenue, the gross product that this province has ever had.

The diversification grants, I be lieve there were 7, 000 applications for grants to date for farm diversification. Expansion of the Crop Insurance program to encomp ass a wider range of crops, I think will be very wel come in my constituency as I am sure in the constituency of many members on the opposite side of this House.

Febr uary 5, 1974 91 THRONE SPEECH (MR. ADAM cont'

d) One of the programs that I was-- (Interjection)--I heard something from the back up there, but one of the programs that I was very interested in, that is to increase the hay production, fodder production, and that is on Crown lands. There has been a reluctance on the part of farmers who were leasing land to develop these lands, pay for the development themselves, and I have been certainly hoping that this program would come out as soon as possible and now it is here announced, and it's not a barren wasteland as the Leader of the Liberal Party states. This is a very, very significant program.

It may not affect the southern part of the province because I presume-- I don't know whether there is much Crown land there that is leased, but I see the Member for Rock Lake saying that it will affect their constituency and I am sure that they will also be pleased that this program is coming about. So now we will be able to open up a lot of Crown land that in many cases were not too productive, and certainly will help the farmers around Lake Manitoba who are subject to high water flooding, high wind factor flooding.

They may be able now to develop their Cr own lands for better use and they may not have to depend so much on wild land for native grown hay. And I think that insofar as the budget is concerned, this is one of the highlights as far as I am concerned, and I am very pleased to see that it now will become a fact. I am also pleased with the new homeowner grants. While some may criticise it is not high enough, perhaps I can agree with that but nevertheless it's a start, and I think that this, the record of this government the past four years, certainly is one to be proud of as far as pub lic housing is concerned.

I know that in my constituency we have already two senior citizens housing units have been built and, well, one is completed and the other one is under construction, and we have many, many low rental housing now completed, where people will have decent accommodation. You know, this is a far cry from what we heard, what we've seen in past programs of the previous administration, and I don't want to be critical and I'm not trying to be critical or funny or anything like that, but I just want to say that we certainly can be proud of what we have done in the last four years.

Now, I have had the opportunity and I see the Member from Minnedosa is not there, but I had the opportunity to officially represent the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Housing and I had the honour of officiating at the Minnedosa Senior Citizens Home there, and it's a six storey building. I'm telling you this is something quite substantial, beautiful, a very beautiful senior citizens home, and I believe there is one to be opened very shortly in the Member from Birtle-Russell's constituency, so I am sure he will be pleased with the record of this govern ment as far as housing is concerned. Right? Right?

The Member for Birtle-Russell agrees, nods his head in agreement. I think the assistance for Denticare for our children is another very good program and I'm sure hoping to see it introduced as soon as possible. I know we won't get too much opposi tion from members opposite because it's a very much needed program for our younger people. It doesn't matter for people my age whether we have any teeth any more or not, but I' m cer tainly anxious to see our childre n have good oral care.

I am also impressed with the new program for parks, the allocation of $2, 300, 000 for park facilities, and I will be certainly looking forward to working with the new Minister res ponsible for the Department of Tourism and Recreation. I should also maybe congratulate him at this time for having been appointed to that portfolio and I am sure that we will get along real well.

I would like to also mention a few words about, well, perhaps I should before I leave it then, I know that I might disturb the Member for Gladstone, but I want to just make an obser vation on the checkoff but I want him to know that I am not opposed to the referendum any way. I am not opposed to the referendum for the checkoff although I would like to see it delayed until there was a list of voters that would represent the majority of the producers in the province.

I think this would be desirable even for the Manitoba Beef Growers, if they have a representa tive vote on this because there will always be criticism if some people, for whatever reason, are not on the list. MR . SPEAKER: The honourable member has five minutes. MR . ADAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll be closing my remarks very shortly. But just in passing, on that particular point I see there was a brief presented by the National Farmers Union and in this brief they mention the gross, since the inception of the checkoff

92 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. ADAM cont'd) ... in Saskatchewan the fund draws $386, 000, $386, 232 since its incep tion, and a good part of this has gone, in fact they claim that it could have been treated as tax revenue because a lot of it went to the Saskatchewan Research Council, the University of Saskatchewan, the Western College in Veterinary Medicine, Saskatchewan Department of Agriculture and the Regina Exhibition, and a sizeable sum went to Agribition, a recently inno vated AgriBusiness Exhibition. They claimed that these funds could have come from other sources.

They also say that a good portion of this money went to finance three organizations: the Saskatchewan Federation of Agriculture, the Saskatchewan Stockgrowers and the Canadian Cattlemen's Association. Those three organizations received over $83, 000. 00. I don't think that this is quite right. That shouldn't be that way. · I don't believe I have to mention too much about Northern Affairs because I'm sure that we have some speakers here from the north and I'm sure that they will cover that quite ade quately. What I wanted to mention though was ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please.

Would the honourable member state his point of privilege. MR. J. DOUGLAS WATT (Arthur): On the point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the honourable member could tell us what percentage of western farmers belong to the National Farm Union? MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. That is not a privilege. The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. Three minutes. MR. ADAM: I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker.

I thought that you were cutting me off. --(Inter jection)--No, I'm sorry - I hope - I mean perhaps he could ask the question some other time because I want to, before I close, I want to touch on our wildlife, and I'm quite concerned about this. Last year I asked the Minister to ban all lead shells, shot shells in Manitoba.

Of course this did not come about but I want the House to know that there is an estimate that three million ducks die annually because of lead poisoning, not because they have been shot but because they ingest it when they eat in the - when they eat their food from the bottom of the ponds and the pools and they ingest lead along with the food and they die of lead poisoning. And this is sad. This is sad because I can tell you that every pond, every pond that's suitable for hunting ducks, are covered, covered with lead in the bottom. --(Interjection)-- I agree.

There's an article I know I won't have much time to carry on but there is an

article here in one of the papers - I hope you've all read it. It's the "Canvasback Ducks are Threatened" and it's an

article by Dr. Hochbaum and the canvasback duck population is estimated to have been reduced to approxi mately 200, 000 and it is getting quite serious. --(Interjection)-- I am telling the Minister. I am telling the Minister that we should ban the shot shells as soon as possible. There's a new shell coming out that's--they hope that it will overcome this problem. It's

part lead, part other metal, but it should be as soon as possible. I would hope that you would do your utmost, Mr. Minister, to investigate as soon as possible because we're going to destroy all our ducks with the way we're doing, and our wildlife, our waterfowl. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR. EARL McKELLAR (Souris-Killarney): Mr. Speaker--just don't be nice to Ed--I want to congratulate you on your re-election as Speaker.

I know the job that you're going to have to do to control the 56 members here who are trying to express themselves all at once, many times. I'd like to also congratulate the Deputy Speaker, the Chairman of the Committee, the Honourable Member for Logan, on his re-appointment here and I know his job will be important as it always has been important trying to keep the comittees in order here from time to time. Now I'd also like to congratulate the new members here who moved the Address to the Speech from the Throne, the Member for Rupertsland and the Member for Crescentwood.

I don't see the Member for Crescentwood here this evening but the Member for Rupertsland is. I want to congratulate you. I know how important it is the first speech that you make in this place and it's just like going amongst a bunch of tigers and trying to express yourself hoping that everybody will listen and sometimes they listen and sometimes they don't. But if you can't get the attention of the members you have to hit them over the head somehow and this is what you have to do to get the people to understand you. And I know the member that--I really thought the Member for Rupertsland did a terrific job.

And one of the reasons why he did a terrific job, I thought, because he knew when to quit, he knew when to quit. But I thought that was a big

February 5, 1974 93 THRONE SPEECH (MR. McKELLAR cont'd) ... disappointment in the Member for Crescentwood. Now I think there's one thing in public life, is knowing when to stand up, how much to say, and when to sit down. Now I know-- (Applause)--I have attended church - I go fairly regularly - and when the preacher doesn't stop on time I always think he makes a poor sermon. If he quits on time and he hits the point and quits, I figure I've accomplished everything on Sunday. So that's the way I hope to be here tonight.

And speaking on this very important Throne Speech- First· Session of the 30th Legislature, and I want to say that this happens - I came here on the 25th Legislature and this happens to be the 30th, and I don't see my friend the Honourable Minister of Labour around here this evening, he must have taken for cover. I was hoping he'd be here because I was going to lecture that man. I want to lecture him, and I want to lecture the House Leader, because on the second last night I was in this building they kept me till 7:30 in the morning. They kept me till 7:30 and I'm telling you, I'm telling you, Mr.

Speaker, you could have died, you could have died. A MEMBER: You damn near did. MR. McKELLAR: You could have died, and a lot more of us could have died. It's just that important that somebody in the Rules Committee has got to do something about that. If we can't trust the men opposite somebody in the Rules Committee is going to have to do something about this. I' m telling you it's just that important. I know the First Minister wasn't here. I think he's got some conscience. He was in Toronto or ottawa at that time. But I'm telling you, Mr.

Speaker, as Chairman of the Committee, and I hope you are chairman, that you have mercy on all the members of the Legislature. And to those members who weren't here, who weren't elected, and there's ten of them in the Chamber right now, you haven't lived until you've spent the whole night in this building. You haven't lived. And I'm telling you that's got to stop. I thought two years ago they were bad enough- 5:30 in the morning. No, that wasn't bad enough. They did it a little more.

But I' m telling you if you want to--the bunch of farmers stayed here and I tell you God bless the farmers because they're used to hard work and they stuck it out. Some of the city fellows had to go home and have an hour's sleep but I tell you the farmers stayed it out. Mr. Speaker, change the rules. Change the rules. Change the rules. Mr. Speaker, we've got important things to deal with but I tell you with a government like we've got in the Province of Manitoba you've got to watch them every day of the week, every day of the week. They can't be trusted, they can't be trusted.

By God the First Minister was going all over the Province of Manitoba telling everybody we're going to save you 15 percent on automobile insurance. Telling everybody for the last two years, telling everybody for the last two years. And I tell you it didn't take long for the people of Manitoba to find out. Because he changes ministers. In the first breath the new Minister said, we've got a deficit, we've got a deficit. Admittedly $8 million. Eight million dollars.

I don't believe the First Minister should have gone around the Province of Manitoba telling the people as he did during that elec tion how wonderful Autopac was. And if that isn't bad enough, then he's got the gall to come and say, we can do things better. And he's telling the people of Wawanesa, Mr. Speaker, he's telling the people of Wawanesa that he knows more in his little career in automobile insurance than they did since 1896, since they did in 1896.

By gar I don't have to go and tell anybody in the Province of Manitoba who knows something about insurance and I tell you, I tell you, you're going to get the fight of your life, you' re going to get the fight of your life when you bring in that bill. And I don't know who's going to bring that in but I tell you our new Minister had better smarten up because he's got a lot to learn. I'm sure he's going to get some training from the former Minister who was in charge- I'm afraid he is. But It ell you there's the man that's responsible for the whole thing right there, sitting right before you.

He's the man that's responsible. And I'm afraid the people of Manitoba aren't going to listen to him very long either. Mr. Speaker, there is the board of directors, they are right in front of you, there they are, every one of them. The men that make the rules, the men that make the regulations. And I tell you they're not good enough. They're just not good enough. Do you know what would happen, you know what would happen-- should happen? They should be kicked off the board. In fact the chairman of the board sitting right over there-who isn't there tonight, shouldn't be allowed.

Anybody that has an $8 million deficit for one year should be kicked out and that's what anybody else would do.

94 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. McKELLAR cont'

d) Now I know they're going to stay; they think they know best; and they're going into the field - and not only are they going into general insurance, they' re going into accident and sick ness, and they're going to run all the private insurances and pension plans in the province. Now that's another thing they're going into. I never heard about that and the likes, and that's something new, and I tell you the people of the Province of Manitoba might have something to say before you get your hand in my pension plan, I tell you that. You'd better try to get your hands in my private pension money, you'd better try.

And I tell you there's going to be the biggest ... you ever saw in your life. Mr. Speaker, that's the way the people at Souris Killarney feel, and 11 m only speaking on their behalf here. And I tell you it does my heart good to be back here in this 31st session of the 30th Legislature--(Jnterjection)--o f the 30th Legislature to express the views of the people. And I tell you they're great free enterprisers in my constituency. They're great free enterprisers. And that's one of the failures of this government. They always think they can run things better than the people themselves. My God the people know best.

The people are the most wisest - you fellows haven't got the background. You haven't got the background. I see a lawyer, I see a few fellows over there; there's nothing - nobody's run anything. You know if you want to confuse things you get a lawyer to do it. I got a lawyer here, I guess in my Leader, maybe I shouldn't say that. I tell you a lawyer never made a decision in his lifetime. All he did was give you-- (Applause)-- 1 hope my Leader doesn't feel bad but that's an actual fact. And I tell you, Mr. Speaker, if you want to really confuse things you get a professor to do it.

You get a professor to do it, and I tell you that's the trouble in the Province of Manitoba. That's the trouble in the Province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, we've got important things bothering us in my constituency, we've got im portant things. One thing was an environmental problem. The Honourable Minister has got people in his department running all over my place trying to tell the farmers in my area how they should operate their livestock operation. And I don't think that's right and proper.

I think you've got to have an education--if you want to bring in new programs and tell the people they can't water in the creek, there's water in the river, that's one thing. But not to go and issue orders all over the place saying to the farmers, you can't do this, you can't have feed lots, you can't have an animal going to the creek. And I think this is wrong.

And I think it's about time that the Minister in charge - and I'm referring to the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources and Environmental Management, he's the man - that's got to slow down some of those people out in your area and find out what the farmers will put up with and what the municipalities--a nd there is another thing. The municipalities aren't very happy with this program that your men are going out issu ing orders to various farmers. They're mad, and I'll tell you why they're mad.

Because somebody - if you tell a man that he's got to move his operation, livestock operation, some body's going to have to pay for this ... and it isn't going to be the farmer. And all I'm saying on behalf of the farmers who live on the creeks and rivers in my constituency, and there's plenty of them, that they want at least fair play. Fair play. That's all they're asking for. But they don't want a government coming out, and civil servants, telling them what they got to do.

Now I want to make that plain that I haven't made an issue out of this up to now because I always thought the Minister would maybe tell his civil servants to slow down a little bit. But they're not slowing down, they're going ahead. So I'll carry on the fight during the estimates of the department that you represent. Now there's other important things. I'm glad the Minister of Agriculture is here because he's been running wild the last year, just running wild, running wild.

He runs all over the farmers, treats them like dogs half the time; he tells them what's good for them; he tells them what they should get for their feed grain; he tells them what they should get for their hogs and how they should sell their hogs, and everything, and it just really bothers the farmer. And I tell you--1 just noticed in the Free Press Prairie Farmer - the Co-operator I mean- that my neighbour is selling his hogs. And why is he selling his hogs? Why is he selling his hogs? Because Sam just fooled around with this darned Hog Marketing Board to the point where now everybody is going out of hogs.

And what's going to happen to hogs next? And I'll tell you what's going to happen six months from now. My gosh you talk about fertilizer, and you talk

February 5, 197 4 95 THRONE SPEECH (MR. McKELLAR cont1d) •.. about sugar going up, you wait till the price of hogs six months from now. You can't interfere. You can't interfere, and I have told the Minister of Agriculture a year ago, and I told him the year before, keep out of the farmers' business. Keep out of the farmers' business. It is simply that. That's a good lesson in democracy, a good lesson in democracy, and until you've learned the hard way, until we hit you hard enough that we can get that drilled into you. But I know the philosophy of the Minister of Agriculture, I know that philosophy.

He thinks that he's sitting in that little first floor down here, that he can run that little empire, and if he can't run it right he switches the Deputy Minister out and puts a new Deputy Minister in; he switches the animal industry man out, he puts a new man in there, puts another one in agri cultural credit, and first thing he knows he's got everybody in there agreeing with his philosophy; and this is simply what the Minister of Agriculture has done, simply what he's done, simply what he's done. Did the farmers ever ask for many of these changes that he's brought in? Did they ask for the land lease?

I don't think--! never had one farmer ask me for land lease, no, not for five years. But I'll tell you what's happening to the farms are being taken over under fore closure by the Agricultural Credit. No farmer will ever be able to buy them back. No, they'll be kept under the domain of the government from then on. Just as the mineral rights are going to be taken over - they are, presently are by the government. Simply that. They want control of the land; the philosophy of the government. And this disturbs me, disturbs a lot of farmers in my area. Why do you think I got 3, 100 majority? Why do you think?

Because they're simply scared of you fellows, simply scared. And I tell you they're going to be as scared for a long while, too, and they're not going to remember the actions of the government at present. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, I think it's about time that I dwelt on to another subject be cause I'm not going to keep--there's other members here that want to talk. But I think it's about time--Oh there's one other thing, one other thing, that's bothered me in agriculture. You know, I didn't realize till last year that the Minister of Agriculture was interfering with the United Church.

I happen to be a member of the United Church. But I don't know what he's trying to prove. He's hired all the United Church ministers in western Manitoba. He got two out of Br andon and you know what he did? You know what he did? He made them into Anglicans. You know what he did, Mr. --he didn't have a name for them, you know, but this is customary. He didn't have a job but he created a job, and he called it Community Affairs Specialists, Community Affairs Specialists. Now if that isn't the biggest political I don't know what, that I ever saw.

Because that's all it is, and I don't want to downgrade the United Church, not one little bit. But that's all it is. It's a farce, a political farce, and he might as well know it right now because it just isn't--there's nothing to it, nothing to it. Hire somebody that knows some thing about agriculture if you want to hire. Somebody that knows. But leave the clergymen where they belong; leave the clergymen where they belong. Mr. Speaker, I think I'm like the Minister of Labour--excuse me--lost my voice. I'll try to get it back. Mr.

Speaker, the Department of Health, I think it deserves some attention, des-erves a lot of attention this year. It didn't get very much either; it got lots of confusion. But I don't know--where's the old Minister of Health? I guess he's deserted the ranks. But it amazed me, it always amazes me why government's got to look for a fight because my God, they usually end up in. . . But this government actually looked for a fight this year with the MMA. It looked for a fight. Now why would they look for a fight? I can't tell you after the election.

I could tell you before the election because we experienced that in Saskatchewan a few years ago, a few years ago, where there was a fight between the doctors and the government and it was for a very good reason. They wanted to stir up and divide people, and this is what you do. You divide people when you put a special group against--when the government goes against a special group, and this is what happens. Now all you're going to do by stirring up a fight with the MMA would hurt the Province of Manitoba.

That's the only people who are going to lose is the Province of Manitoba, not--and I want to say something, Mr. Minister, right now. You're the one behind it. We have a com mittee in Manitoba, we have a Committee in Manitoba, HESP it's called, and this is the minis ter here in charge, and we also have a secretary for that committee, Dr. Tulchinsky. And this is the two men here I figure that were causing the confrontation between MMA and the govern ment. I honestly believe this. And I think it's a sorry mess and I'm sure glad it's coming to a--

96 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. McKELLAR cont'd) ... if there's a contract signed or some agreement signed, I think it's about time. Because rural Manitoba - and I'm referring to rural Manitoba- we're going to be the losers. We're going to be the losers in the long run. Mr. Speaker, there's a few other things in this department that I want to talk about and one is about dental care.

And one of the problems we have in rural Manitoba is lack of dentists and I think this is a- -i f you're going to bring in this program some assistance will have to be given to dentists to make it possible for a dentist to go into rural.Manitoba. We are very short of dentists and I think this will have to be done. Now another problem that we're having in rural Manitoba is planning of hospitals, and I understand now there's been a new change in policy this last year and the one change has been that you've reduced from seven beds per 1, 000 people to four beds per 1, 000 people.

Now I know what this will do to rural Manitoba because our population is dropping, and it will mean pretty soon that it will be possible that many communities won't even have a hospital. And this is one of the problems in the planning stages that we're having at the present time. And I know that many of the hospitals will not be big enough to actually be much use to the community. Mr. Speaker, this government over the years, over this year or two, its record has not been very good. In my opinion I think that they need to get down to the people's level.

I think that they need to listen to the people a lot more than they did. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I see the honourable member is under some difficulty. I am sure that all of the honourable members would be willing to have his time saved up if he wishes to carry on on another day or another member. MR. McKELLAR: I'll just finish. I just want to end by one thing. I got a little tonsilitis. I just want to end up on a key note, on a key note, and I'm S(}rry the Minister isn't in but I was waiting on the Minister to come in, the Minister of Public Works.

But I never saw a man issue so many keys in all my life as that Minister. That Minister, the speech he gave this afternoon here, and I thought he was going to come out with an oratory and I thought he was going to come out with a lesson for all of us here this afternoon. But he didn't say anything. All he did was accuse all our members of everything that we've done over the last f(}ur years and tried to belittle us.

And I would only say to the Honourable Minister- I know he isn't here- that if he wants to take a lesson in keys, that I hope that some day he'll decide which key he wants to use because I have never had so many keys in the last six months in this room across the way here. Some of these days-- he doesn't trust anybody and this is the note I am going to get at. Why is it this building means so much to him that he wants to change the locks every hour of the day practically? This building is a public place.

Nobody is going to steal it, and I'm sorry that he isn't in here because I would have had a lot more to say to him. Mr. Speaker, this government, this government in my opinion, even though they got elected- and I want to congratulate everyone in this room for being elected- but I don't think they have the trust of the people where I come from and I don't think they have the trust of the people of the Province of Manitoba.

And they're strictly-- some day you're going to learn, some day you're going to learn that you can't bring all the Socialist philosophy in and try to blend it in with the free enterprise system of government. You're trying to work too fast; you're trying to foist it on people; and I'm sorry to say, Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry to say it's a sad day for Manitoba when you've got to be controlled from the cradle to the grave, cradle to the grave, like we're being done in Manitoba. It's got to change. It's got to change. It will only change maybe with another four years. I'm hoping it will.

I'm going to do everything I can. Minister of Finance, you hold the purse strings; you hold the purse strings. Put the money into good use but don't tell me, don't tell me that you're going to take all my money out of my pocket and tell me how I can spend it better than I can myself. I think I can spend my money better than you can spend it for me. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. HENRY J. EINARSON (Rock Lake): Mr.

Speaker, the usual and customary ritual in this Legislature when we rise to speak on our first occasion, and in this case it's the opening of the First Session of the 30th Legislature, I wish to commend you, Sir, for being elevated to the position of Speaker which is the highest office, I think, that can be bestowed on anyone in this august Chamber. I, along with other members who have spoken, also wish to convey my

February 5, 1974 97 THRONE SPEECH (MR. EINARSON cont'd) ... hopes that we all have the understanding of the sometimes diffi cult and trying times you might find yourself in, and that we can all control ourselves in trying to deal with the business of the Province of Manitoba and in this way achieve those aims and goals for which we were sent to do. I would also like to convey my best wishes and congratulate the mover and seconder of the Speech from the Throne.

I, along with my colleague from Souris-Killarney, wish to say also that this being your maiden speech, and I can recall the day when I was in that same posi tion when I replied in describing the constituency which I represented. But I want to say, Mr. Speaker, at this time that I would be remiss if I didn't say to the people of Rock Lake constitu ency, expressing my gratitude to them for seeing fit to send me back for a third term to repre sent them in this Legislature. I think, Mr.

Speaker, I had pretty well decided how I was going to conduct my speech it's not going to be too long - but I want to say that I have been listening this evening to some members, this afternoon and this evening, on the opposite side of the House, and I would like to deal first with one matter that the Hono urable Member from Ste.

Rose mentioned in his speech, and I think if I understand him correctly he was talking about those of us on this side in the Conservative Party - and I don't know whether he's referring to my colleague from Gladstone as being somewhat two-faced or having two ideals, namely espousing the fact that we are free enterprisers and on the other hand also favouring compulsory type of legis lation. Mr. Speaker, the Honourab le Member from Ste. Rose used as an example . . . MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourab le Member for Ste. Rose state his point of privilege. MR.

ADAM: The Honoura ble Member for Rock Lake states that I said in my remarks that the Member for Gladstone was two-faced. I woul d like him to withdraw that remark. I did not make that statement. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. EINARSON: Mr. Speaker, I think the member, if he would listen carefully, I didn't say that the Member for Ste. Rose had said the Member for Gla dstone was t-wo-faced. I said that he used an

interpretation that had a connotation to the fact that we were trying to espouse two philosophies, namely free enterprise and a compulsory as pect of legisla tion, and he re ferred to the present vote that is taking place in the Province of Manitoba that pertains to the checkoff, to the checkoff in regards to the promotion aspect of beef in the Province of Manitoba. He made a statement, Mr. Speaker, that I think must be corrected and the farmers of Manitoba must have the facts straight. And I want to inform the Member for Ste.

Rose - and I'm sur� prised that he didn't know this - that the cattlemen of Manitoba have always said, "In no way do we want government to meddle in our affairs". They have been trying for checkoff for the past four years. Lorne Parker was the gentleman who was selected to go around the Province of Manitoba speaking to the producers of beef, explaining to them what has taken place and the details of the whole program. Mr.

Parker indicated to the producers and all those that I am aware of, that he was successful in having _all the compulsory features or almost all the compulsory features taken out of the kind of legisla tion that would be established to provide a livestock marketing council, promotion council, to collect these to promote that product. With one exception, Mr. Speaker. That the Minister of Agriculture said it had to be compulsory. And I want to make this fact clear, Mr. Speaker, that at p.o time did I or any of my colleagues in the Conse rvative Party ever approve of any thing that has got to be compulsory.

I also want to make it abun dantly clear to the farmers of the Province of Manitoba that we in the Cons ervative Party have never been in agreement with marketing boards as such, but let me say this: that if a com modity group, whether it be cattlemen, whether it be hog producerr, whether it be dairymen, egg producers or poultry producers, if they wanted a board, then we would not stand in their way. I've said this before, Mr.

Speaker, and I hope that it's abundantly clear to those opposite now, and I think this is very important and in no way do I want to make any comment here to night that is going to jeopardize the decision-ma king and the ballot that is now taking place, and will for the next few days.

I don't want to be in the position that the Minister of Agriculture found himself when the rapeseed vote was taking place in this province, or that is, discus sions were going on first and foremost followed by a vote, when he took a full page in our rural paper, namely The Manitoba Co-operator which reaches about every farm home in the Province of

98 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. EINARSON cont'd) ... Manitoba, spent the taxpayers' money to espouse his own philo sophy and to attain his own gain. Whether he knew that the farmers agreed with him or not, he seems to have that self- righteous attitude that he knows best what is best for the farmers of Manitoba. And, Mr. Speaker, I just want to make that comment in regards to the checkoff voting that's taking place in regards to the product of beef in the Province of Manitoba. So the Member from Ste. Rose wlll not accuse me of being too - that is offering one system and then the other. We can't have both.

Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm not going to refer too much to the Throne Speech because many of my colleagues are doing that. There are a number of issues I know in my constituency and I'm sure I think in the whole Province of Manitoba now, particularly in the rural areas. I want to speak briefly about the Mineral Tax Act and I think, Mr. Speaker, that this has to be repeated from this side of the House. This has to be repeated from this side of the House. Yes, the Minister of Finance, he sort of sits back in rather disgust to think that he's got to listen to it over and over again. But you know, Mr.

Speaker, the bill was introduced last session; it was given first reading and it was g,iven second reading, and the thought occurred to me that when he talked about taxing the mineral rights in this province I immediately thought of the thousands of farmers throughout this province who owned the mineral rights to their property but were yet seeking no revenue from it. That was part and parcel of the title to their property and I couldn't understand why this government would want to bring in that kind of legislation to tax people for something that they were receiving no revenue on. You know, Mr.

Speaker, we've watched and worked and debated with this government for a long enough period of time now to know that they're out to tax the people of Manitoba in any way, shape or form that they can, to get as many dollars into the coffers of their treasury. That's really, I think, basically the fun damental part of the way our Minister of Finance and this government operate. I'd like to read from Hansard, Mr. Speaker, a quote from the Minister of Finance- I believe second reading- and to quote, Mr.

Speaker: "The rate of tax proposed is ten cents per acre on the mineral rights with respect to parcels of 40 acres and over, and tax would be on mineral rights held by corporations, not by individuals. An internal study made by govern ment has shown that about three-quarters of the mineral rights, some 9. 1 million acres, are held by individuals, and it is not proposed to tax those at all. The remaining one quarter, the mineral rights, some 2. 9 million acres are in their corporate ownership and will be taxable under this bill. " And there, Mr.

Speaker - you know I've known the Minister of Finance for I think a good long time, probably known the Minister of Finance much longer than any of the other of his colleagues on that side of the House. And I've always admired the Minister of Finance for his intellectual ability, and so on. But it amazed me, Mr. Speaker, to think that the Minister of Finance - the Minister of Finance would quote those words, Sir, and then in third reading bring in an amendment to the act to the point where he has confused the people of Manitoba concerning this matter, the kind of confusion that we haven't seen in many many a year.

And on third reading, Mr. Speaker, I wasn't sure, nor was I satisfied, that that amendment was going to solve the kind of problem that I feared on second reading. We now know, Mr. Speaker, that that is the case, that that is the ca se, in spite of the fact that my honourable friend, the Minister of Finance is going to say to some of us on this side, "Well we, you know, made the amendment and we thought that everything was going to be all right.

" As a lawyer himself- and I don't profess, and I'm not a lawyer, and I find it very difficult many times to try to interpret the' kind of legislation, because it's done by people like the Honourable Minister of Finance To interpret, to interpret this legislation; and when the Minister of Finance finds it difficult to understand it, what does he expect from those who are laymen on this side? That is the question I pose to him, Sir. As a result of all this, we have real confusion in the minds of thousands of people in the Province of Manitoba as it pertains to the mineral legislation.

I wasn't comp laining about cor porations and probably companies, trust companies, who have leased property to lease the mineral rights. They probably have a vested interest for the time that they are leasing those rights. If they want to tax them, that's fine, that's part of their business.

But to tax t}:le mineral rights to property that an individual owns - and I give you an example where I think this government is totally wrong, that whereby a farmer, and many of them now are retired, for various reasons, that they're not able to work their land themselves, may turn it over to their sons, or they may have turned it over to a relative or someone, they're the people, Mr. Speaker,

February 5, 197 4 99 THRONE SPEECH (MR. EINARSON cont' d) ... that are being taxed, and I say taxed unjustly. It's only those individuals, as was stated in the second reading, the Minister of Finance told us - the people I'm talking about now are being taxed, he said they would not be taxed, in second reading. Now how can we trust the government when they come out and say these things and then do something differently in the actions of the legislation that they propose.

My colleague, the Member from Souris-Killarney, made reference to the Clean En vironment Commission as it is operated under the Minister of Mines and Resources. I think that - well it's not, I don't feel that it's repetition, but I want to say, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the constituents that I represent, and I know that - and I've had people from other areas; I've had people from the constituency of the Member for Ste.

Rose because of the Clean Envi ronment Commission Act, where a farmer who had a feed lot along a water runway, the pressure of the Minister of Mines and Resources De partment, the pressure was put on this farmer to either move his cattle feeding operation --(Interjection)--Yes, well of course, my colleague from Lakeside is giving me some real assistance here and I appreciate it. But, Mr. Speaker, this particular gentleman in the area of the Honourable Member from Ste. Rose, the pressure was so great and they made it so tough for him that he decided to sell all his cattle and get out.

But the thing that he told me, and this is what really appalled me, that there were farmers down the way that were pretty well in the same situation, but the fact, Mr. Speaker, they were good supporters of the government on that side and so they were left alone, and so they were left alone. --(Interjections)--Mr. Speaker, I know that all the members on that side of the House when they hear some comments like that, they don't like it, they don't like it, Mr. Speaker. --(Interjections)-- MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Minister of Mines. MR.

GREEN : The honourable member has charged that people were treated differently by the Environmental Commission, which is a commission that I have no communication with at all, because they were New Democrats, and I want him to substantiate those charges by giving us the names of the people who were given favoured treatment as against the farmer that he is talking about. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. EINARSON: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, this is a branch of his department. --(lnterjection)--The gentleman, Mr.

Speaker, that gave me all this information -I didn't ask him if I could use his name in this Legislature. --(Interjections)--I didn't ask him if I could use his name in this Legislature, but I believed him. I believe him, Mr. Speaker, because you know we're going to be able to substantiate many situations, Mr. Speaker-- (lnterjections)- whereby we can prove-- (lnterjection)--that this government--(Interjection)--have lost their credibility in the eyes of the people of Manitoba--(Interjections)--We1re going to be able to prove it.

We already did with the MACC last year-- (lnterjections)--and we have another one that is going to come forth in the very next few days. --(Interjections)--So I say, Mr. Speaker, I don't think the citizens at large will pass idle gossip if there are not some facts to it. Mr.

Speaker, I have contacted the department , civil servants of this government - I'm not at liberty to string out names -I mean, this is the orderly process of government and what democracy is supposed to be.-- (lnterjections)--We depend on those people - the ministers don't - we're not in touch with the ministers on all things that we deal with and so we have to contact the people under whose leadership they are, and as a result of it, Mr. Speaker, as a result of it, Mr. Speaker, we rely on the information they give us, and I think they do it in good faith. But you know, Mr.

Speaker, the problem is, when they get into Cabinet and some things filter back to them -I don' t know, I' m just assuming because of the way this government has been operating for the last several years--(Interjection)--That 1s the only way I can assume this because when these things come out, and we're talking about Clean Environm ent Commission, and the things that are happening in the area of my colleague the Member from Souris-Killarney, and I know are filtering into my area, we wonder just where is this government going.

Many times people are asking, they don't know what - the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, and that's about the size of it. And as far as this Clean En vironment Commission is concerned, Mr. Speaker, I have brought it to the attention of this government in the last session, and I give them some examples of what I was told, a fair warning I thought, but it has been of no avail. They' re going right

100 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. EINARSON cont'd) ... ah ead with a determination to dictate to the farmers of this province in the way they think is best. I think I'm fair to say that the Minister of Mines and Resources has said, you know, once I'm elected by the people, don't confuse me with the facts, I know what is best for them, or words to that effect. I'm not quoting-- ( Interjection)--l'm not quoting, Mr. Speaker -- ( Interjections)-- MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR.

GREEN: I have made it quite clear to the honourable member that I have nothing to do with the decisions of the Clean Environment Commission, that their decisions are com pletely independent.

I do not - my point of order to the honourable member is that the Member for Rock Lake has said that I have directed the Clean Environment Commission to do certain things with respect to certain farmers, and I am telling the honourable member that the Clean Environment Commission is an independent commission set up in the Legislature by legislation which was introduced by the Conservative government and that I do not in distinction from how it was previously, that two years ago we set up the commission as a q uasi judicial body, and I have nothing to do with the decisions that are made by the Clean Environment Commission.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. EINARSON: Mr. Speaker, this is utterly unbelievable, coming from the Minister of Mines and Resources. Do I interpret from his comments that he has divorced himself com pletely of the responsibility of his department? In essence, Mr. Speaker, that's what he's telling me. -- (Interjections)-- Every one of them have got commissions appointed in the various departments, whether it be MACC, whether it be veterinary clinics, whether it be Clean Environ ment Commission, to protect these ministers-- (lnterjections)- - MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR.

GREEN: Will the honourable member permit a question. Does the honourable mem ber say that the Minister of Justice has divorced himself from his department because he has nothing to do with the way in which judges decide cases before them? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. EINARSON: Mr. Speaker, I think the Minister of Mines and Resources is trying to twist things in such a way that he feels that he's now- I think he feels now that he's established himself -t urning this into a court room, and he's challenging the prosecutor as defending someone, or defending himself' now I guess. Well, Mr.

Speaker, this is really amazing. Now I'm beginning to understand and if all the ministers in the front row take the same attitude as the Minister of Mines and Resources, it's no wonder that the citizens of this province cannot reach them, but that's the state we're in today. They cannot reach the ministers. It's no wonder, Mr. Speaker, that we are faced with troubles. They talked about open government in 1969 -197 0, but the people of Manitoba I think now know better. Well, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to use one more example.

The Minister of Agriculture, I'm sorry, is not in his seat, but I want to use a headline - and I don't think, Mr. Speaker, that you know, we're wasting time here. I think that this is something as an opposition member, I as a critic, have to bring to the attention of the government the things that concern the people in my constituency, and I'm sure in other constituencies. Sir, I want to talk for a few moments about the Hog Marketing Board in the Province of Manitoba. And we have a heading here "Resignations Called For - The Hog Marketing Battle Erupts". Well, Mr.

Speaker, I go back a few months, and I happened to be in my home at noon this parti cular day, and if I am home I'm in the habit of listening to the Farm Broadcast, which I think is of interest to all farmers in Manitoba. Nearly all broadcasts - it runs for half an hour, three quarters of an hour, and they bring to the attention of the farmers - it's an informa tion service - of the things that are going on, both in the Province of Manitoba and across Canada generally.

And I recall, and I don't have the exact wording, but I do recall where the Farm Broadcast had phoned the Minister of Agriculture's office after- and I am now at liberty to use the gentleman's name- I got that permission and I'm going to do it. Of course I don't really have to make it public, it's been in the papers for so long and probably one of the greatest reading material, of the greatest interest to so many farmers.

Namely, this gentleman is Don Cameron who is an elected member of the Hog Marketing Board, and the Farm Broadcast dis covered that this gentleman was very unhappy and other members of the Hog Marketing Board were very unhappy in the way that it was being run under the chairmanship of Mr. Max Hofford.

February 5, 1974 101 THRONE SPEECH (MR . EINARSON cont1d) ... They asked the Minister of Agriculture if he would like to com ment on this, and the Minister of Agriculture indicated that Don Cameron, and we can't say it in this House, Mr. Speaker, that he was a liar and that he--(Jnterjection)--he did not have his facts correct and that he was nothing but a trouble inaker, that he knew that elections in the areas where these gentlemen were appointed were up for election, and that-- (Jnterjection)--he should be asked to resign. Well, Mr.

Speaker, I think that com ing from the Minister of Agriculture, this is a very serious matter, and I think it's one classic example that we ca n use and we can register, we can register the position of our Minister of Agriculture in the Province of Manitoba, and apply it all the way down the line insofar as any other comm odity is con cerned. But the Farm Broadcast didn't stop there. They then, Mr. Speaker, phoned Don Cameron and asked him for his comm ents, and he replied.

He said, "If the Minister of Agriculture can prove that I am wrong, " he sa ys, "I will not only apologi ze to him and to the chairman, but if the people who so elected me wish that I resign, " he sa ys, "I will do so. "--(J nterjection)-- That' s right. It was an honourable thing to do and there was nothing further sa id after that. -- (Jnterjection)--Fol lowing this, Mr. Speaker, the Minister was supposed to have written a letter to Don Cameron on Decem ber 8th, and I understand - I don't hav e the letter before me, Mr.

Speaker - it was supposed to have come in today but I didn't get it - to prove to the Minister of Agriculture that this is true, and I understand, Sir, that Don Cameron didn't receive this letter until Jan uary 18th. I couldn't understand why, because of the controversy that the Minister of Agriculture got hims elf into, because you know, Mr. Speaker, I want to sa y to this House and to the people of Manitoba, the seriousness of this charge, is not only against an elected official of the Hog Marketing Board but reflects on all those farm producers who elected them. --(Jnterjections)- -You know, Mr. Speaker ...

MR. SPEAKER: Order please. MR. EINARSON: I want to make one other comment in this connection and say, Sir, that -- (Interjections)--! ' m not going to read this whole article, Mr. Speaker, because that is unne cessa ry. I' m picking out the highlights that I feel that are pertinent and very important to the portfolio of our Minister of Agriculture. There' s one other item that I want to mention in this article, and I quote: "Mr. Atkinson who stood up in the audience im mediately after Mr.

Uskiw's welcom ing speech to the conven tion" - this is to the National Farmers Union - "called on the government to disband the Hog Marketing Board, some of whose members are elected while others are government appointed, and reconstitute it with a commission consisting of appointed members. He sa id it could be a model for all Canada. He said the Fa rmers Union had wanted the board kept as a commission when it first evolved. Well, Mr. Speaker, I' m not going to ch astise the Fa rmers Union, in no way.

I want to make that abundantly clear, because there are, I know, many farmers in my area, and I' m sure in other areas, that are members of the Farmers Union, and are farmers who are doing a good job for themselves and for their community and mean well. But, Mr. Speaker, I cannot tolerate the comments that come from their leader, Mr. Atkinson, who sug gests in what he is purporting to sa y here, is that we throw democracy out the window and bring in a totalitarian system of government, that's really in essence what he is sa ying. And, Mr. Speaker, I challenge Mr.

Atkinson anywhere, on a public platform if he wants to, because I am very concerned when anybody repres enting a farm organization uses that kind of language. Mr. Speaker, we're not in Russia yet. A MEMBER: Hear, hear. MR. EINARSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to refer to one other matter, Mr. Speaker, that - and I should hav e probably used it earlier when I was talking about the checkoff on the vote that is going to take place. The heading, Mr. Speaker, is: "The Farmers Union Protest Speech Checkoff Votes.

" And I indicated earlier that the Minister of Agriculture had assured the beef producers that pretty well all the com pulsory features would not be applied in sofar as setting up a council to ca rry out the administration of colle cting a checkoff if this vote ca rries. The only compulsory feature he demanded was that it was com pulsory vote. But, Mr. Speaker, I understand the Farm Union, or a group of them, met with Messrs. Premier, the Minister of Agriculture, and I don't know who else in the Cabinet, but the Premier, Mr. Speaker, and I quote here: ''Mr.

Schreyer promised that possible defects in the referendum would be explored. " And he was referring to the referendum that is now taking place. You

102 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. EINARSON cont'd) .. . know, Mr. Speaker, this indicates what I was trying to tell the honourable members opposite earlier, that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. And after the Minister of Agriculture assuring the beef producers, and I serve fair warning, that if he uses the beef producers like he's used the hog producers in the Province of Ma nitoba, if he thought he had fights and battles in the past, he hasn't experienced anything yet. But now I am concerned, Mr.

Speaker - and there's been confusion here, and the Cabinet now have confused it still worse, when the First Minister says one thing after the Minister of Agriculture assuring the farmers of the way it's going to be. I say, Mr. Speaker, and the Minister of Agriculture has so often used that phrase "stay option", I think, Mr. Speaker, that he would be much more correct if he used that phrase "steak option" and he'd be much more correct. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. . . . . . continued on next page

February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHER NIAC K: Mr.

Speaker, I was waiting to hear another member across the way speak somewhat about mineral acreage tax so that I could make some contribution to the debate, hopefully limited pretty well to that area. 103 But before I do so, I want to comment only briefly about the speech made by the Honour able the Member from Wolseley, the Leader of the Li beral Party, and indicate that in my op inion he expressed a num ber of opinions as to policy program which were positive, which are helpful, which are worth thinking about, which have been thought about many times; which will continue to be thought about.

Some of his facts however as presented by him distressed me a little, because I do believe that one should make an effort to report honestly. I'm not suggest ing that dishonesty is only wrong statement, but I think inadequate statement is also not quite a proper report. For example, when he speaks about unemployment, and says that some four and a half years ago there were 10, 000 unemployed in Manitoba, that today there are 19, 000 unemployed1my information is that it would have been more correct to say 16, 000 on average.

I'm told also it would have been correct to say, had he wanted to, that in December the total was 17, 000 which was down 6, 000 from the previous year, but what would have been even more helpful for a proper evaluation of the point he was trying to make is the fact that jobs in Manitoba have increased by something like 7, 000 a year, and that' s at a time when he is talking about a low growth, a slow growth rate. When he talked about cost of living having risen 13 percentage point to an unprecedented high, he did not say that it is the second lowest of any major city in Canada.

It would have been helpful if he had done so. When he spoke, and this is--1 asked for the source and he promised to give me the source, on economic growth rate. which he says in Manitoba has been 3. 28 percent while Canada has been over 46 percent higher on average at 4. 82 percent. The comment I was given is that it is false, and that' s why I asked for the source. I'm told that we've exceeded Canada three times in the last three years; so somehow we can compare those figures and find out. But I would say that it was a positive contribution that he made .

Unfortunately I can't say the same for the Leader of the Opposition, and somehow there's been some change, and my recollection was the Leader of the Opposition gave a fairly well tempered and positive contribution,

whereas the Leader of the Liberal Party was not so solid a year ago. The .position has changed where we listened on Monday, was it? to a lengthy, lengthy speech by the Le ader of the Opposition Vlhich brought him to a new low in my estimation, and that of others, which made a number of criticisms of this government and its programs, some with some validity, many without, but which gave - and I must say, Mr .

SpEaker, I looked again at what he said, and I asked somebody who I consiu(,red n m partisan to r(:ad ni s speech, give me his C·:mHnents - L>r-rc ·was nc•thiLg ::-e,ll in the s<.cnsr" ,,r program of J.nlic y . n[ what it was that he would do if he were sitting on this side with the group that was with him. He talked about commissions and enquiries and he made attacks on our government's admin istration and on our program ; he talked about tax cuts; but what he would do if he were here was left completely to the imagination of those who know him best. But what I got out of what he said, and I admit, Mr .

Speaker, that he did get at me because he did make me upset a number of times by his demeaning himself, his Party, and this Chamber, by the style of speech which I had hoped he had set aside some years back. But I think he, as I say, acquired a new low, almost as if it were a pleasure to get back dabbling in the mud as he did in the past. Mr. Speaker, I, as the Member for Rock Lake says, we've known each other for some time. I didn't quite recognize him today as I knew him before because I felt that he too was attributing statements and attitudes on this side which were not warranted.

When he talked about the Clean En vironment Commission, I asked for the copy of the act because I thought it would be interesting to check my own recollection of it, and I find that in the Clean Environ ment Act the powers of the commission are described that they are for the purpose for carry ing out the duties and functions of the commission where it shall have the like protection and powers and be subject to like requirements as are conferred on or required of commissioners appointed under

Part V of the Manitoba Evidence Act. Now that to me carries with it an indic ation of independence which is supported by the fact that under

Section 11, the commission is required to prepare and submit to the minister an annual report on various matters - and they'r e listed - and this report must be tabled by the minister who may have done so already

10 4 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEECH (MR. CHE RNIAC K con't) .... or if he hasn' t, I remind him that he should within the next ten days or so. That report is to be tabled and the commission knows very well that whatever it puts into tre report must be tabled and brought to the attention of the public of Manitoba, and the suggestion that the commission would be directed by the minister to discriminate as between people on the basis of their political support is I think shocking, but I admit not too surprising latterly as accusations that have been coming from that side.

And of course we' re jus t behind - an election is just behind us. And you know I must -- I'm sorry the Member for Rock Lak e has absented himself, be cause I campaigned in his constituency for a day or two and there are two recollections I have other than from the fact that it's very pretty part of the country, of the province - two recoll ections I have. One is a little old lady saying to my wife, "Well, he's back, and I'm glad he is back".

May I just repeat that 1 am reporting on a couple of incidents that took place while I visited the constituency of Rock Lak e in support of a very nice upstanding candidate named S. . . , and two items stand out in my mind. One was at a sort of a tea or coffee party, a little old lady saying to my wife: "You know, I really can't believe that Mr. s ... 's Party would take away our church the day after the election. " And we laughed.

But I don' t know, because the other thing that impressed me when I was in that constituency was some sort of a mimeographed pamphlet that had been issued about the theft of the farms, the Government of Manitoba is out there to steal the farms from the people of Manitoba, supported of course by an advertisement. . . MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake. MR. EINARSON: Would the Minister permit a question ? How many people attended that meeting? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR. CHE RNIAC K: Mr. Speaker, Mr.

Speaker, the meeting - I was talking about a coffee party, and that was a number of people, but oh, the member says there were very few people that came to see us, maybe they were frightened that their churches or farms would be taken away because that's the propaganda I ran into in Rock Lake on the day or two that I was there, and that was supported by the propaganda that came out in the newspaper with a drawing of the Legislative Building and two big arms reaching out, and that is the farmer of Manitoba in the future.

That kind of advertising was issued by that Party across the way, was of a low and false nature, because in fact our stay option is that kind of a program which should be understandable and could be debated on an intellectual and logical level, rather than the use of scare tactics, the use of scare tactics used by some of the members of the Conservative Party, and I make the point, some of the members, because I only saw it in some of the areas of Manitoba.

The provincial advertising I saw, it was not too good, nothing to be proud of; but in certain areas of Manitoba I saw this kind of scare tactics, it rather disgusted me. --(Interject ions) --I did not see it in Swan River. Maybe I didn't look far enough, because I really, I found it difficult to campaign against my friend in Swan River. Although I offered my services, I did it so halfheartedly that I didn't - th at's why he made it I suppose.

However I want to spend a few moments on the mineral acreage tax, because the first day or the second day we were in the House, somebody used the word - some expression like, did the Minister of Finance deceive --( Interjec tions)-- mislead - the word "deceive" is not new in the mouths of some of the people across the way in relation to what I did to the mineral acre age tax, so "mislead" might be the word that was used here. I accept the statement of the Member for St. Vital. I think I heard the word "deceive", maybe it was on radio or some where else. All right. The Member for Riel, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

And I did hear that, didn't I? The word "deceit". But, Mr. Speaker, I also heard the Member for Brandon West make some insinuations. Did I intend, did the Minister of Finance have certain intentions? Well, I would have thought that somebody on that side would have read the record, cause it' s there, it' s all in Hansard. Somebody should have read it. Oh, the fact is they did, because the Member for Rock Lake did read the beginning of the first speech on the second reading, and then I think he stopped reading, or if he didn't stop reading, he stopped understanding. --(Interjec tions)-- Pardon ? Right, Mr. Speaker.

He made his point on a false issue by reading the first paragraph and ignored the rest, so I' ll tell him what it says)I'l l tell him what it says. It starts out, Mr. Speaker, with the introduction on second reading of a bill wherein I

Februat'y 5, 1974 105 THRONE SPEECH (MR. CHER NIACK con't) .... explained the purpose of the bill as being the charge on corp orations for the holdings of mineral rights rather than the C:evelopment of mineral rights. It's in Hansard on - I'm sure the honourable member has a copy there of that date, which is Page 3888. And I said the tax would apply only to corporations not to individuals, since the latter would not in general have sufficiently larg1 nd holdings for mineral development.

At that stage on July the 6th, if one would believe members of the opposition, they stopped funct ioning mentally, because that's as far as they are now in the mind of the Member for .Rock Lake, that' s as far as he got.

As one listens further to what they'r e saying now about it, and one compares it with the record, and one wonders if they are still not functioning mentally, because the Leader of the Liberal Party questioned on the exemption of individuals from the tax, and I again mentioned that individuals could not be involved in that idea of not developing mineral resources but holding for speculative purposes.

But then debate developed further and the Member for La keside indicated his support of the bill with some reservations vis-a-vis the size of the tax burden on corporations in Manitoba relative to other provinces and that, I'l l telL him1 appears on July 7th, page 3932, but I guess nobody bothered to check on that. The Member for Rhineland, Mr. Froese, agreed to the proposed tax in principle but he was concerned that once established it mig ht be extended to apply to individuals. Do you hear that Mr. Jake Froese sitting in that chair said that, now is that tax likely to be applied to in dividuals?

Well then debate concluded, we went into committee. In committee the Leader of the Liberal Party indicated his approval of the principle of the bill but he suggested two changes. That appears on page 4063 and 4064. Firstly he argued in favour of an increase in the tax rate. In addition the coverage of the tax should be extended to individuals holding mineral rights for speculative purposes.

Otherwise - I'm paraphrasing him but I have the exact words - otherwise the existence of the tax would encourage the corporate speculators to de- incorporate and thus avoid the tax, and on tax avoidance I accept the Leader of the Liberal Party as being somewhat of an expert. When the Member for Rock Lake pointed out that corporate farmers should be exempt from tax, just as speculating individuals should not, and maybe I should tell him, page 40 65 - well I'm reading a paraphrase ; maybe I should look to see just what he said. I suppose he knows what he said. I'm quoting now from the Member for Rock Lak e.

We're talking about corporations; we talk about mineral rights. "There are many farmers who own their farms and they own the mineral rights. That's written into the title if they have title of their property. Now if I understand the bill correctly if I incorporate my farm, I own the mineral rights, I'm then going to be taxed on those mineral rights. Is that correct? If so I think that• s an injust ice insofar as the agricultural industry is concerned because why are we incorporating those farmers who may want to incorporate.

There are various reasons why they want to incorpor ate their business." Of course the real reason is tax avoidance, isn't it? But that's okay. That's an acceptable reason. --(Interjecti on)-- The Member for Rock Lake can not yet dictate to me on what issue I determine to talk about. I'll go on quoting him. "This isn't Russia or Cuba or Chile or Spain you know. " Th en he says, and I quote again the Member for Rock Lak e, "There are various reasons why they want them. One of them I can say ... " MR. EINARSON: Would the Minister indulge in one question? MR. CHER NIACK : No. There 's eight minutes left.

I'l l do it when I'm through if I'm through in time. "One of them I can say is a valid one because of the economic bind that the farmer finds himself in and if there' s any advantages to incorporating because of tax reasons" -- did I say tax avoidance? Well so did the Member for Rock Lake."H e does it because he's forced into it, because he finds it that much more difficult as the years go by to operate his business to keep his head above water insofar as the financial aspect of his operation is con cerned. The other thing is" -- oh this goes on too lengthy.

"Now the mineral rights that a farmer has to his farm, really it doesn't mean anything, it has no value really. He 's not ex ploiting, he's not exploring them. They're there unless some oil company wants to come and lease his property. This has been done years back. I had the experience where companies have come to me and wanted to lease my property for just a tuppance, ten cents an acre, which incidentally is the tax. It doesn't mean anything hardly but the implications the farmers got themselves into " - I can give an example about his father.

And he concludes by saying, "I want to say very strongly to the Minister if he's going to apply the tax to the mineral rights to a farm because it's incorporated I think it' s totally wrong, I hope he will reconsider that point. "--( Interjection· )--Th e Member for Rock Lake said that.

106 February 5, 1974 THRONE SPEEC H A MEMBER: Oh my gosh. MR. CHER NIAC K: So then, Mr . Speaker, debate continued and the Leader of the Li beral Party suggested that the distinction should be whether the principal use of the land is or is not farming for tax exemption or liability respectively. The situation of corporate farming was also a concern to the Member for Birtle-Russell, although he recognized the government's intention to tax only to tax speculators. I quote here, page 4069: "Well, Mr.

Speaker, the Minister had indicated that it is not their intention to become involved with the taxing of agricultural land so I would ask him would he make a specific exemption for corporate farming or co-operative farming? SUrely that's not too hard to do. " And it wasn' t, Mr. Speaker, as we will see. He was right.

At the committee stage having considered the concerns expressed by the Conservative and the Liberal Parties of the previous reading, I proposed amendments to the bill such that the tax would apply to those corporations and individuals holding mineral rights whose principal occupation is not farming rather than simply all corporate -- co-operatives holding mineral rights. And the Member for Morris did make a contribution. Honourable members would be in terested to know because he's made lots of contributions on this issue in the last few weeks so I should remind him he made a contribution.

Because the Member for Riel, the Member for Riel on being presented with these amendments said, I don't know how far these amendments were distributed but well we've not yet had a chance to go through them. Rather than attempt to deal with this immediately I think we'd like to examine them at some length. But the Member for Morris said, I quote: "Mr. Speaker, I don't like to disagree with my colleague but the Minister was kind enough to distribute copies of the amendment, proposed amendment, early this afternoon.

We discussed it amongst a group of us and I had given the Minister assurance that we would be prepared to proceed with the -- to deal with the amendments tonight and I hope that can take place now. " That was enough to put the Member for Riel in his place. Now the amendments received unconditional support from the Leader of the Liberal Party. And he said that there were three fundamental concerns over the bill. Now members must have been present, members must have been listening. I quote the Le ader of the Liberal Party. "T hree fundamentals.

First was that it was not clear enough that farmers who had mineral rights would escape this tax. This has been corrected by the bill. Second concern was that corporations which were farming corporations, fami ly corporations, would inadvert ently be taxed of their mineral rights. The amendment before us cured that defect. Third criticism, or issue, that we took with the bill was that individuals would escape the tax who in effect were mineral rights speculators, and this seems inequitable.

The amendments the Minister of Finance has put before us cure this escape hatch." And he says that - that he had said previously, that without the amendments he would support the bill but with the amendments he would enthusiastically support the bill. But then there was some more discussion. Mr. Froese was still concerned about the definition of "farmer" and he mentioned the fact that supp ose he as an MLA finds that he's got a poor year and his farming operations are very low but indeed his big income is being a member of the Leg islature, would he be covered, and he was reassured that he would.

And the Leader of the Opposition entered into the debate and spoke at some length and he said, and I quote: Mr . Speaker, I will not be able to -- I could finish if I were allowed three minutes but I don't like to ask. --(I nterjection)-- Thank you. Thank you for that.

The Leader of the Opposition suggested that the intent of the original bill had been changed by the amendments which he said were as follows; the intentions, and this is his words, again, page 4143: "And so what has happened as a result of this Act, or proposed in this Act, will be that at least there will be a payment by way of a tax which would indicate either ultimate use or the question being put to the people or the corpor -- the people" I repeat, "the people or the corporations holding the land that there was going to be a continuing tax to be paid if they wanted to just hold on to the rights without in any way dealing with it in allowing a clean-up to take place.

" I hope the. . . MR. SPEA KER: Order please. The Honourable Minister will have an opportunity to finish. MR. CHERNIA C K: I thought I was given leave, Mr. Speaker. I don't insist on it but. MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable Minister has another 18 minutes to go.

February 5, 1974 107 THRONE SPEEC H MR. CHER NIAC K: I don't intend to use more than my notes on one page only. I then in response to the statement by the honourable the Lead er of the Opposition, I pointed out that the intent has not changed, the original bill provided for an exemption to individuals other than corporations, and I'm quoting from page 41 43. "We are now proposing to remove that exemp tion!

The intent is no different and the intent is very much as described by the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition, and I continue the quote: "It would have a salutary effect to have people who own mineral rights attempt to find out what their true value is by rleveloping them or on the other hand, of course, if they feel it' s not worth it to give it up. At the same time it is a tax on the ownership of mineral rights and therefore, as it was expressed by the Honour able the Leader of the Li beral Party, is a tax on wealth to that extent.

" So the intent is not changed but the exemptions are being varied or proposed to be varied by this amendment. " Mr . Speaker, the debate concluded, concluded really with a speech by the Member for Lakeside and I quote only a short portion of what he said, and he was the last speaker. I can't help but revel in what he said. Page 4145 and I quote: "And if only, Mr.

Speaker, the members opposite would take time as this Minister did on this particular bill you know to in fact bring about better government as a result of our participation and our discussions rather than in most cases dig their heels in and avoid and not listen to the concrete suggestions that are forth coming on this side. Then surely, Mr. Chairman, we would in fact be fulfilling our function here as legislators of the Province of Manitoba.

" Let me conclude by telling the Member for Gladstone that exactly what he was talking about, people - and the Member for Brandon West - people who owned land and left farming and sold their farms we find now have retained mineral rights. They went to the trouble of saying here is the title to the land but hold - mineral rights I will keep, the farm you can have. Well what are they if they are not speculators? And we did not know, and we still do not know, the extent of these people, but the fact is that these people are now speculators.

They are in vestors and they fall right into the category described by the Leader of the Opposition. I conclude, Mr. Speaker, by reminding honourable members that although urged to in crease the tax beyond ten cents I said I would like to keep it at 10 cents to keep it minimal so that after the experience of a year of acquiring knowledge then we will be able to reassess our position and come back to report on what the position should be. That I am prepared to do; that I will do. We are still acquiring information.

But it doesn't help to have misleading statements broadcast over the province when the people present participated in the variation that took place in the bill in the changes that did, participated and concurred. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. --(I nterjection)-- Pardon ? The Honourable Leader of the Liberal Party state his point of privilege ? MR. ASPER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

I was momentarily called out of the room and during the period I was out I understand the Minister of Finance ma de a reference to me in his speech which I wish to draw to his attention as a ma tter of privilege but because I don't have the verbatim report of what he said I am following the rules by giving you notice, Sir, that I intend to raise the point of privilege as soon as Hansard is printed. A MEMBER: Sit down. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. Order please. Order please. Order please. Let me inform the honourable member that you cannot raise a point of privilege in anticipation.

The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. --(Int erjections)-- Order please. Would the honourable member state his point <;>f privilege ? MR. ASPER: No point of privilege has been raised in anticipation. I am following the rule that requires, that requires a member to raise a point of privilege on the first occasion upon which he has notice that it has arisen. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. The honourable member hasn't stated a matter of priv ilege so there 's nothing -- no point in giving me notice. The Honourable Member for La Ver endrye. MR. BOB BANMAN (La Verendry e): Mr .

Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Fort Garry, that the debate be adjourned. MOTION PRES ENTED and carried. MR. SPEAKER: The hour being 10:0 0 o' clock the House is now adjourned and stands adjourned until 2:30 Wednesday afternoon.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	30-1-5
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	30th 1st hansardpdf 5.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	dc60058f4f4958293cdc4e153bbffcfd5de40581

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