Manitoba Hansard — 23 February 1981 (Sitting 24A, 31st Legislature, 5th Session)

31-5-24a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, 23 February, 1981 Time - 2:00 p.m. MR. CLERK, Jack Reeves: It is my duty to inform the House that the Speaker is absent today and I would therefore call upon the Deputy Speaker to take the Chair of this House in accordance with the Statutes. OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Deputy Speaker. PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. CLERK: I b~ to present the petition of the Mennonite Collegiate Institute pray for the passing of

an Act to amend

an Act to incorporate the Mennonite Collegiate Institute. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER, Abe Kovnats (Radisson): Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . . . Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports ... Notices of Motion . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. ALBERT DRIEDGER (Emerson) on behalf of the Member for Crescentwood, introduced Bill No. 22,

An Act to amend The Architects Act. MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin) introduced Bill No. 26, The Medical Laboratory Technologists Act. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. HOWARD PAWLEY (Selkirk): Mr. Deputy Speaker, a question to the Minister of Education. Material prepared by the Federal Social Development Minstry which, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I'd like to table in the House, indicates that the federal share of post-secondary education costs have now reached 70 percent in the 1979-80 fiscal year and concludes that provincial funds indeed were directed from post secondary education to other areas.

I ask the Minister in light of his preparation for upcoming discussions pertaining to the financing of post secondary education, federally and provincially, if the Minister can advise whether he is undertaking a similar analysis as to federal-provincial and other contributions to post-secondary education costs as the analysis done at the federal level. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Education. HON. KEITH A. COSENS (Gimli): Mr. Deputy Speaker, certainly I will be holding discussions with my colleague the Minister of Finance on this whole matter.

There is some concern among Ministers of Finance, I understand, across the country that the Federal Government is on the verge of cutting back on the moneys that they have usually allotted to post-secondary education and I believe that what the honourable member is referring to are figures that may or may not be accurate, that would orchestrate this very nicely, but certainly I'm quite prepared to discuss the matter with the Minister of Finance and compare our particular position. I noticed that in one particular

article it suggested that in the Maritimes all of the money that was going to their universities, for instance, was accruing from the Federal Government's transfer of payments. In some research that was done on it about a year ago in this province we found that was not the case at all; that a goodly portion of our post-secondary funding was coming from our Provincial Treasury. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, further to the Minister of Education, he refers to proposed federal cutbacks.

What we're dealing with is allegations pertaining to provincial cutbacks, '77, '78 of 32-point-some percent down to a little under 15 percent. Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister is, what does he see as Minister of Education, as responsible for colleges and universities in the Province of Manitoba, what does he see as an appropriate target for the share that should be assumed by the Provincial Government in regard to post-secondary education? Ought it be 15 percent, 20 percent, 30 percent? MR. COSENS: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I'm not at this time prepared to come out with any particular percentage; I couldn't tell you what the percentage has been for the last 5 or 6 years; I couldn't tell you what the percentage was under the previous Government in this regard. Certainly the Minister of Finance may have figures that will illustrate what that percentage has been. I merely tell the honourable member that in the research that we did last year, we found out that the Provincial Government was indeed supplying a considerable portion of the moneys that go to post-secondary education in this province. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, it would be much more helpful if the Minister would tell us what he knows rather than what he doesn't know. Mr.

Speaker, further by way of supplementary to the Minister, as the Minister is heading into what is recognized everywhere as critical negotiations pertaining to Federal-Provincial cost sharing pertaining to post-secondary education, in view of the fact that there are serious allegations of the province moving away more and more from its fair share of post-secondary assumption of costs, does the Minister not feel that at this stage that he has an moral commitment in order to strengthen his credibility in dealing with the Federal Government pertaining with Federal-Provincial cost-sharing arrangements to set a minimum level by which the Province would agree to insure that it assumes?

MR. COSENS: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the argument being put forth by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition reminds me very much of the argument we heard from a Federal Minister in regard to health a year or so ago, and that particular argument was proven erroneous by the report of Judge Hall. Now 971

Monday, 23 February, 1981 the honourable member is attempting to ride the same particular horse in post-secondary education. I would tell him of course that the negotiations going on are carried on by Ministers of Finance, not by Ministers of Education in this regard. As far as Manitoba is concerned I would suggest to the honourable member that a 13.8 percent increase in university funding alone will probably be far beyond any percentage increase that we see from the Federal Government. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Minister makes reference to health funding.

We will be delighted to deal with the entire question of federal provincial cost-sharing of health later during this session. Let me assure the Minister that there appears to have been a gross misconception as to what is taking place in Manitoba vis-a-vis Ottawa pertaining to financing of health care in this province. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, again to the Minister, can the Minister advise whether he does intend to take some small position pertaining to future Federal-Provincial negotiations pertaining to the level that the Provincial Government should be assuming in this province pertaining to post-secondary education costs? MR. COSENS: Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have taken a very firm position as a council of Ministers of ·Education on this topic and deplored any cutback in the transfers for post-secondary education to the provinces.

We have not been specific in the percentages because the transfers do not envisage percentages; they departed from that particular situation in 1977. So as far as the percentage that the honourable member is after, no province has come up with a percentage that they consider fair in this regard. They have come up with the position that says that they cannot envisage a cutback of the federal funding without great harm being done to the Provincial Treasury. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, just by way of further supplementary, does the Minister intend to file today or tomorrow, a response to the tables which were filed last Thursday pertaining to the allegations by the Association of Canadian University Teachers as to the cutback on the part of the province of its provincial share of post-secondary education costs? MR. COSENS: Mr. Deputy Speaker, as soon as we have had an opportunity to examine all of the figures, all of the statistics that are relevant to this particular matter, then I would be quite prepared to table anything that's relevant. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. JAY COWAN: Th<;~nk you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Northern Affairs. It is our understanding that the Minister has been approached by several representatives of northern communities in respect to requests for action by the government in reference to the possible bankruptcy of Lambair and the economic dislocation which may be created by that potential bankruptcy.

I would ask the Minister if he can now specify what action he or his government has taken in order to prevent that economic dislocation or to, in some way, lessen the impact of that economic dislocation. At the same time we would ask the Minister if he can inform us what possible actions he may have under active consideration at this time. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. HON. DOUG GOURLAY (Swan River): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can confirm that I have had a telex this morning from a group of businessmen in the center of Churchill with respect to the Lambair situation, and I would say that we are concerned about the lack of service that will be evident into many of the northern communities. However, since Thursday or Friday of last w~k. my colleague the Minister of Labour has had some discussions with respect to Lambair and perhaps he would like to comment further on this situation. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please.

If I could just interrupt the proceedings for one moment, I would like to direct the honourable members' attention to the gallery where we have 55 students of Grade XI standing from Churchill High School. This school is in the constituency of the Honourable Attorney-General, and under the direction of Mr. Alex Sebeski, and I would ask the honourable members to join me in welcoming this group here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTIONS (Cont'

d) MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. HON. KEN MacMASTER (Thompson): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think the question has two parts, certainly two parts that I have a major concern with. The first one being the supplying of service that's been licensed out and permits given and licences given to Lambair, that service being providing passenger and freight service to the communities in northern Manitoba, in answer to that particular question and I don't think that was precisely asked by the Member for Churchill, but I would suspect that he has some interest in that.

We have been informed that an interim permit will be issued possibly tomorrow morning to deal with the service that has been awarded the type of service permit licence that was awarded to Lambair in servicing people in Northern Manitoba. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: I thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. That certainly was part of the question when we discussed the economic dislocation that would be created by this potential closure.

But I would ask the Minister of Labour since he appears to be the one who has been conducting negotiations in respect to possible action by the government, can he indicate if his government is going to take any action to assist those communities or any action in order to try to prevent or forestall this bankruptcy, or potential 972

Monday, 23 February, 1981 bankruptcy of Lambair, so that the service can continue at levels as it has in the past? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Churchill threw a word in which is absolutely incorrect. I think it was a misconception on his part. I have been carrying on no negotiations.

I have been made aware by a good number of people as to the events as they took place, and the assurances that I have been given is that an interim service will be granted to one of several applicants who are wishing now to step in and provide the service that Lamb is not at this moment capable of doing, and that interim service permit, I suppose is my expression for it, I suppose there's a more technical one, but that permit will be issued I understand, tomorrow morning. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It appears as if the government has been doing very little in respect to the possible bankruptcy.

The use of the term negotiations was perhaps more of a hope than an actual fact. But I had hoped and anticipated that they would have been negotiating in respect to providing levels of service and also negotiating, or at least holding discussions with persons respecting the loss of wages for those employees who are going to be thrown out of work and with wages owing them, I might add, by this potential bankruptcy.

In fact, those employees are out of work now. 1 would ask the Minister, as Minister of Labour, if he has directed his department to investigate this situation in order to determine if The Employment Standards Act has been followed, as I understand there were more than 50 employees it would call into effect certain provisions of The Employment Standards Act under Notices of Termination, and I would ask him further hoping and anticipating that he has directed his department to conduct those investigations, what the result of those investigations were? MR. MacMASTER: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the Member for Churchill may or may not be aware, but the aerospace industry in our country is a federal jurisdiction. It is not an Employment Standards provincial jurisdiction. Point 1. Point 2, we have been in fact, in touch with the Federal Government. We have arranged that if a committee is needed that will be established. I have met with the Lambair people, the employees in Thompson, meetings between themselves and the Federal Government have taken place.

If in fact, an interim carrier is put in place tomorrow, there is a good possibility that a number of - and I can't give you the exact number - a number of the employees who are presently unemployed - and I say momentarily, hopefully, because somebody has to pick up the pieces and I think that will begin tomorrow - that those people will be back at work at that time. And yes, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have given them my personal assurance that we will do everything possible to get back their back wages.

In the long run, somebody somewhere is going to pick up that particular contract to service those communities and hopefully part of the picking up of the contract will be the picking up of the lost wages to those particular people who have approximately three weeks wages outstanding, one week being a holdback, two weeks in salary. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to ask a question about this subject of the Minister of Economic Development, and ask the Minister if he or his senior officials have met with the management of Lambair to see whether there was any assistance that his department could offer. I note in the newspaper, Mr. Speaker, that officials of the company have been desperately trying to get in touch with various government officials. So has the Minister and his department tried to assist this company in surviving? I understand from newspaper reports that there have been attempts made by the company to approach various government officials. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Economic Development. HON. J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek): To my knowledge, there has been no official representation made to my department. There was a call made to my department by somebody from Lambair, January 6th, that was answered the same day and the person who was calling me wasn't available. Another call was made on the 12th, was answered on the 13th, and again the person calling was not available. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, if the honourable members would bring themselves up to date as to what exactly has happened during this period, they would find that there were negotiations carried on by an appointed trustee and that as late as last Friday there were arrangements made for someone to become part of that Lambair organization and would put it on a financially firm basis. That fell through. This morning it was in court, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, and as the Member for Thompson mentions, that somebody will be appointed to take care of the service and I'm sure that we will be watching it very very closely to see that they do have service in that area. MR. EVANS: I thank the Minister for his information, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I wonder however, and perhaps it's too late, but would the Minister be prepared to look at the company to see whether there is any type of assistance that could be given to keep a large, historic air service operative in Northern Manitoba; one that many remote communities are very dependent upon? I refer the Minister, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, to a statement by the former vice-president, Mr. Greg Lamb, who said it would take only $200,000 to keep the operation going. I am not suggesting that a loan or a grant be made, but I would ask the Honourable Minister whether he would undertake to look into this to see whether some assistance may be worthwhile and to keep a very historic and very important - I believe very important - operation going and serving the people of the remote communities in Northern Manitoba. 973

Monday, 23 February, 1981 MR. JOHNSTON: As usual the member wasn't listening. As of last Friday there were arrangements made between two parties to have this company become stable and operate according to the licence that they are given by the CTC to supply the areas that they are supposed to supply under the licence. The Minister of Labour from Thompson just mentioned, which is correct, if they do not supply it, the CTC will appoint somebody to give that service, and that's what we're concerned about, service to the north. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, then could the Honourable Minister give us an assurance that the quality and level of service to these remote communities will be maintained or are we going to see a fragmentation of service, a deterioration of service and indeed fewer jobs involved thereby? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Transportation who sits behind me is as aware of the position as I am, as the Minister of Labour, and as the Minister of Northern Affairs is, and I assure you everybody in this government will be very concerned and watch very closely to see that there is service given to Northern Manitobans according to what the CTC lays down, and they have said they would appoint somebody, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MS. JUNE WESTBURY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Honourable Minister responsible for Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation.

I wonder if the Minister would share with the House the information that he gave to the Energy Symposium at the University of Winnipeg last week, in which he reportedly stated that the government is spending $35,000 to upgrade 100 subsidized housing units. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister responsible for Manitoba Housing. HON. GARY FILMON (River Heights): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe that I issued a press release on that matter in conjunction with the talk that I gave last week. MS. WESTBURY: I will have to find the press release.

Would the Minister confirm that substandard insulation and air infiltration were inflating the heating bills and that was responsible for the upgrading; and would he also confirm that residents had complained about shoddy construction of the units, Mr. Deputy Speaker? MR. FILMON: Firstly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will be glad to see that the member gets a copy of the press release; and no I cannot confirm the substandard insulation and shoddy workmanship were the cause and requirement of the program that was entered into.

It's an initiative that Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation are taking, both to demonstrate and to take advantage of energy conserving techniques that are available in the marketplace today, and we would like to be in the forefront of using these techniques in our housing and in fact in retro-fitting existing housing under our control, to take advantage of these techniques. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. SYDNEY GREEN: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Honourable Minister of Economic Development who is concerned with bankrupt businesses providing services to remote communities in Northern Manitoba going out of business.

Would the Minister check to see whether his concern would apply equally to a company that is not bankrupt, that does not require assistance, that has been giving service by water, land and air to remote settlements in the Province of Manitoba and is now being driven out of business by unpredictable decisions and actions of the Motor Transport Board, which wishes to replace this service by two carriers who are deemed in advance to serve communities that this particular carrier has been serving for years? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Economic Development. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would be willing to look into the matter. This is the first that I have actually had it presented to me as a question. I have heard the member really discussing it in nearly every department Estimates so far but I haven't paid that much attention to it, and I will undertake to take a look at it. MR. GREEN: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I did ask about this question in two departments. The Department for Consumer Affairs said that they want the service continued. I asked about it in the Department of Transportation and the Minister had a completely wrong

interpretation as to what has happened before the board. I ask the Minister to check. - (Interjection)- Mr. Deputy Speaker, I find it incredible that honourable members will be amused that a local business company namely, Northland Transportation Company, which has provided - and I have indicated, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I have acted for counsel on this case - there is no argument about that. I don't know why that should concern honourable members.

Should it concern honourable members that a local homebred transportation company, which has been operating service by air, land and water to Norway House and Cross Lake for years, should be driven off the road by the Motor Transportation Board? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Orders of the day. The Honourable Minister of Economic Development. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Deputy Speaker, he refers to the Motor Transportation Board and I said to the member that I would check with the Minister of Transportation regarding this subject about the allegations that he makes. I am not up to date on it. I said I would check on it. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster with a final supplementary. MR. GREEN: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would also ask the First Minister whether it is consistent with his 974

Monday, 23 February, 1981 government's policy on the Constitution, namely that they will not be prepared to let a court decision be the final word where an injustice is occurring and therefore will not entrench rights, whether the Minister will look at this question and see whether it is just that a local business, which has serviced two communities for ten years, be driven off the road or whether it is acceptable to do so because I am their counselor. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. STERLING R. LYON (Charleswood): Mr.

Deputy Speaker, one of the few honourable members in this House who needs very little instruction on proper parliamentary procedure is the Member for Inkster but occasionally we all have lapses. I would suggest to the Honourable Member for Inkster that he argue his case in the proper forum on behalf of his client, not in the Legislature. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. The Honourable Member for Inkster on a point of privilege. MR. GREEN: Yes, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I speak on a point of privilege, because the ultimate forum for the redress of any grievance, and that is where we are at, we are at the ultimate, we are at the point that this carrier is going to be driven out of business by a government board, and I say that the proper forum to address any such grievance is the people of the Province of Manitoba before their duly elected representatives. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood. MR. RUSSELL DOERN: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the First Minister and ask him whether he has received several requests in writing, and in particular a petition and letter from senior management of Flyer Industries requesting a meeting with him to discuss persistent reports about the sale of Flyer Industries. Has he received such requests in his office and does he intend to meet with senior management? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. LYON: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I can tell the honourable member that I have received some requests from employees I believe, of Flyer Industries.

The substance of their comments may or may not have encompassed what my honourable friend said, I don't have a recollection. Those enquiries were sent along to my colleague who is in charge of that, and in due course the government, either through the appropriate Minister or through my office, will be making a response to them. MR. DOERN: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I ask the Minister again whether in view of a concern on the part of senior management who have been attempting to make arrangements to meet the First Minister over the past few weeks, is he prepared to make a ·categorical statement about the continued operation of Flyer Industries, since it may be adversely affecting morale and it is probably as well affecting production capacity? MR. LYON: The answer to the question, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is no. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elmwood with a final supplementary. MR. DOERN: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would also like to know whether the Minister intends to devote more time to the day-to-day problems of Manitobans on such issues as Flyer Industries, unemployment, outmigration, or whether he intends to continue to run up and down the country and over to England to stir up problems over the Constitution? MR. LYON: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, one of the reasons that my colleagues and I sit on this side of the House and my honourable friend sits on the other side of the House is that we have a better sense of the priorities of the community, of the province and of the nation, than do my honourable friends the socialists opposite. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would like to follow up on a supplementary posed by the Honourable Member for Elmwood to the First Minister pertaining to the offers to purchase and the petitions that apparently have been forwarded to the First Minister and letters in connection therewith. Can the First Minister advise whether or not the negotiations that apparently went on and proceeded for some time involving the President of Flyer, as well as the Chairman of the Board of Flyer, were sanctioned; and were they proceeding with the knowledge of the government last December of 1980? MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. LYON: Mr. Deputy Speaker, that's a question of detail that my honourable friend can raise in the appropriate committee when the Chairman and the operative officers of Flyer are there. That's not an operating question for the Premier or for the House. MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Deputy Speaker, the First Minister is probably not aware, but the committee has already dealt with the matter of Flyer and I think it's a very straightforward question, it's not a question of detail.

All it requires on the part of the First Minister is a yes, or a no and surely we can get one or the other out of him. MR. LYON: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I can go even better than yes or no. I understand from the Minister responsible that if my honourable friend will take the time to look at Hansard, he will see that some of those questions were dealt with at the meeting of the Economic Development Committee, rather than picking up some flier - I don't mean the pun, some flier based on some newspaper clipping or whatever, that seems to activate him from time to time with some of his rather more useless questions. 975

Monday, 23 February, 1981 MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MR. A. R. (Pete) ADAM: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. I would ask the Minister if he can now advise the House if a resolution to the problem of undersized mesh nets on Lake Manitoba has been determined at this particular time? I understand that the fishermen were given two weeks notice to remove the particular nets from the lake, and I'm just wondering if the Minister has had an opportunity now at this time to decide what the government is going to do in this serious problem.

MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resources. HON. HARRY J. ENNS (Rock Lake): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'm satisfied that the problem which, as I indicated when the question was first brought to the attention of the House, was by no means a new problem to commercial fishing in Manitoba, the problem of tight or illegal sized nets. I'm satisfied that as a result of meetings that were held with the fishermen in question, particularly those on Lake Manitoba, that the supplier of the nets has agreed to taking all nets back that he supplied in recent times that fit this description.

One of the difficulties however is one of identification. He obviously cannot take on responsibility for all tight nets on the lake and I think that under those circumstances that's a reasonably fair offer that Mr. Leckie, who is the supplier in this instance, has made. We would hope that we can resolve the bigger part of the problem this way. MR.

ADAM: Then I understand from the Minister's reply that the nets in particular that have been found to be undersize, will have to be removed from the water, and whether or not the supplier takes the particular nets back is not a matter that concerns the Minister or the government. That will be something that will have to be determined by the fishermen and the supplier; that's the way I understand the reply. Is that correct, Mr. Speaker? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose with a final supplementary. MR. ADAM: I'm wondering why the Minister refuses to answer.

I have asked him whether or not the fishermen will have to remove those said nets from the lake. It seems to me it's a very simple question, yes or no. He has indicated that some of the suppliers were willing to return these nets if they could be identified as having been purchased from there, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but I would like the Minister to advise if in fact the fishermen will have to remove those nets from the lake. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Natural Resourses. MR. ENNS: Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the fishermen themselves are the first to appreciate and acknowledge that tight or illegal size nets do not work in their interests. There continues to be a discussion dialogue take place from time to time as to how the measurements are being taken. There's a strong belief that's being held that some of the nets do in fact increase under water conditions when they're in the water, particularly the newer plastic or nylon nets but, Mr.

Speaker, the direct answer to the question is that the regulations which are in effect are there for the protection of the fishermen and his future harvesting of that resource and the department cannot and is not being requested to relax those regulations. We have had discussions with the distributor, the distributor has indicated his willingness to return and refund moneys for those nets that he either inadvertently, or for whatever reasons, supplied to the fishermen that were later to be found not of regulation size by conservation officers. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin.

NON-POLITICAL STATEMENT MR. McKENZIE: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wonder if I could have leave to make a non-political announcement today? On Saturday it was my pleasure to join the Minister of Agriculture in Brandon, along with hundreds of cattlemen from all across North America and Canada for the Second Edition Limousine Production Sale which was sponsored and hosted by the Powell family of Glen Care farms at Grandview, Manitoba. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, some 45 purebred Limousine cattle bred and raised by the Glen Powell family were sold at that sale and one animal in particular, a one-year old heifer known as Manitoba Crocus, GK72M, was purchased by a well-known Texan for $37,500.00. Mr. Speaker, I dare say that this was likely a record price for that class of an animal in this province; so I'm sure, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, this House and all Manitobans would want to join me today and congratulate this outstanding Manitoba farm family and at the same time to wish them continued success for the future and their deliberations as well-known cattle breeders. So, Mr. Speaker, to the Powell's of Glen-Care, Grandview, I say we doff our hats this day. Thank you. ORAL QUESTIONS (cont'

d) MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: I would like to ask a question, Mr. Deputy Speaker, of the Minister of Economic Development, with respect to the centre for industrial applications of micro-electronics at the University of Manitoba. I understand that this centre is now funded to the amount of $300.000 per year under the shared-cost program of Enterprise Manitoba. Is the Minister and his department now actively seeking federal funding so that this particular centre can operate at a much more meaningful level then it is at the present time? MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Economic Development. MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Deputy Speaker, in 1978, the federal member that won the constituency of Fort 976

Monday, 23 February, 1981 Garry is it - the one the Honourable Mr. Axworthy represents - he promised them funding during that election and during the next one as well. To date the Federal Government has not put any funding into it. I had the opportunity to bring this subject up with the Honourable Mr. Gray, as all of you know who was here last week because he is planning his Centres of Excellence across Canada, and Mr.

Gray and I had a discussion about it and he certainly said that he would give it every consideration and he and I will be discussing it further regarding Manitoba's Micro Electronic Centre receiving funding through the Centre of Excellence Program of the Federal Government but we have been waiting a long time, Mr. Deputy Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: I thank the Minister, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, for that information and I would like to just ask him a supplementary and that is, whether he sees some time frame in which he will receive a response from the Federal Government in view of the potential importance of this kind of new technology industry in the Province of Manitoba. Has he some idea when we will get a response from the Federal Government on this particular project? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Economic Development. MR. JOHNSTON: I can't give the honourable member a time frame. I just had assurance from the Minister from Ottawa, Mr.

Gray, that he was looking at it and hoped to have decisions very soon, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I can tell you that our commitment was through Enterprise Manitoba, $300,000 a year, and the Province of Manitoba I might say, is very proud of the Centre and I might also say there's a group of private businessmen who have organized themselves together to also raise funding for that particular Centre in the Province of Manitoba. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Time for question period has expired. The Honourable Member for Logan. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE MR. WILLIAM JENKINS: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to make a change on the Committee for Economic Development and substitute the Honourable Member for Rupertsland in place of the Honourable Member for Rossmere. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Orders of the day. The Honourable Acting Government House Leader. MR. WARNER H. JORGENSON (Morris): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Economic Development that Mr. Deputy Speaker do now leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to her Majesty. MOTION presented. MATTER OF GRIEVANCE MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. ALBERT DRIEDGER: I rise on a matter of a grievance. The subject matter of my grievance has to deal with the Federal Drought Relief Program, more specifically with the maintenance program that was announced last year. Last spring we suffered a dramatic drought in this province here and in July of that year the Federal Government announced a direct cash assistance program for the farmers of Manitoba and partly to Saskatchewan.

At the same time the Provincial Government came up with a program of $40 million designated for freight subsidy for feed and for the Green Feed Program. The announcement for the Federal Program was for $67 million, both very needed at that time. The Federal program was to consist of $70.00 per beef animal and $150 for every dairy animal, and $16.00 for every sheep. Subsequent to that in August, the Federal Government announced a further program of $12 million to support the transportation of straw and silage and related programs. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, why I rise on the matter of grievance on this matter is that ever since that time, farmers were banking on the supposition that they would be getting some of this money. What has happened to this time, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is that the Federal Government has had a total of 29,680 applications to date. They have issued 18,235 cheques and they have rejected 9,328 people and this is the reason for my grievance, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Federal Program has created a lot of hardships, it's created a lot of problems within the province, within our livestock operators.

Initially when the announcement was made you couldn't get the forms. Some people to this date still have trouble getting the forms. A Zenith number was established in Brandon; most of the times you couldn't get the information that you needed. The rules have been changed at various times; a short while later the Federal Government announced that the subsidy would not be $70 a beef animal, or $150 per dairy animal, but it would be $35 per beef animal and a maximum of $70 for dairy animals. However, the farmers had to apply by form as most of them did when they finally did have the forms available.

What happened though is the discrepancies in the program, when you take the western part of the province, closer to the head office in Brandon, people were contacted by the Federal Government and asked to make an application. In one specific community no farmers had applied so a federal agent went out there, had a meeting with them, brought the application forms along and instructed them to fill them out; they filled them out, sent them in; a short while later they had their cheques. That was a unique situation.

In my specific area there's farmers that have not been responded to at this time yet, plus the fact that approximately half of the dairy farmers are being rejected, and the method of rejection is so ironical. If a beef farmer applies he doesn't get checked out in most cases; they will take his application and send him a cheque. When a dairy farmer applies, they come out, they do an inspection, they cut the numbers down, and in most cases get rejected. 977

Monday, 23 February, 1981 Mr. Speaker, what is so confusing to the farmers is that farmers living on the same section, one qualifies, the other one doesn't qualify, each situation is the same. Initially it was supposed to be based on grain and the crop insurance yields for the area; later on they changed it to the area precipitation. The farmers to this day do not know where they stand.

I know some farmers have been getting the cheques, their much needed cheques; others that have banked on it, here we are in the month of February going towards spring again and the farmers still haven't got their money from the Federal Government. The same thing applied under the Freight Assistance Program that was shared with the province.

The Feds insisted that they pick up their half of the cheque and they would send their cheque personally; so the province sent out their cheque; the farmer thought that was all the subsidy he was getting for freight and finally finds out that the Feds still haven't paid theirs and it was up to three or four months before they finally did get that portion of it.

It is my understanding that a Federal Drought Advisory Committee was set up that was making recommendations to the Federal Government, and there was a lot of confusion and arguments within this committee that was working on it, and many of the programs that they were suggesting were not implemented. It appeared that nobody even knew who was in charge of the program, whether it was the Honourable Minister Whelan, or whether it was Hazen Argue, or Mr. Axworthy for that matter. Mr. Speaker, this problem still exists.

With all rejections that have taken place I'm sure our federal counterparts have been getting a lot of calls as I think many of our members probably have. They finally established that they are going to set up an appeal board. We are seven, eight months down the road and they are going to set up an appeal board but nobody knows what the rules of the game are with the appeal system. You can phone the Zenith number, they refer you to Regina.

Apparently an appeal board is in place but nobody knows how to go about appealing, whether you can make a personal representation, or are they just going to take the rejections and go through them. It is for this reason, Mr. Speaker, that I felt I had to raise a question here today. I must say though that the Federal Advisory Committee have made comment in their suggestions and I would like to quote here, "I thought that in Manitoba the provincial policies were covering most of the bases. I said further subsidy programs should not be introduced by the Feds to confuse the people.

It also states here in Manitoba, I believe, that provincial programs were more effective at helping farmers acquire feed, and keep the cow herd intact than the federal effort has been," and this comes from one of their advisors. Mr. Speaker, the thing that I find hardest to cope with is the fact that the discrepancies or inconsistencies that have been going on, especially in the area of dairy farms. In one case a fellow had 40 acres of barley; he filed a realistic report on the barley; he has 300 head of cattle, and they felt his yeild was too high on 40 acres and rejected the application.

Another case is that any farmer that has purchased or gone into the dairy or beef business since December of 1979 automatically does not qualify. Another thing is that under the Silage and Straw Program, any farmer that doesn't qualify out of the 9,000 that we're talking about, these farmers don't qualify for the Silage and Straw subsidization either. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture, Federally, Mr. Whelan, is in the city this week. I believe he is speaking to the dairy farmers today, and I hope they bring their message to him as well.

Our Minister of Agriculture, a few months ago, wired to the Federal Minister stating that the farmers should all qualify for the subsidy across the board instead of having this kind of a program. What has happened is we have one farm turn against the other farmer in terms of, I got, you didn't get, this type of thing. I would encourage our Minister of Agriculture that he again repeat to the Federal Minister the idea that we should not have the discrepancies here; that either all farmers get, or no farmers get. The other thing, Mr.

Speaker, I doubt whether it is normal maybe for a member on the government side to get up an air a grievance, and I would just like to say that 1 am disappointed in the members opposite, the few that they have that represent rural areas, that they have not seen fit to raise this issue as well at any given time. The Leader of the Opposition feels more concerned about a Farmlands Protection Act, even though he can find very little wrong with it. The Member for Ste.

Rose has been raising all kinds of issues in this House and I am sure he must be faced with the same situation in his area, and still has never seen fit to raise it. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say that I want to congratulate our Minister of Agriculture for the way he's handled the drought program, and encourage him once more to proceed to try and influence the Federal Minister to straighten out his program so that the farmers at least know where they stand and can proceed with this year's crop. Thank you.

QUESTION put, MOTION carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply with the Honourable Member for Emerson in the Chair for Highways and Transportation; and the Honourable Member for Virden in the Chair for Labour and Manpower. CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - LABOUR AND MANPOWER MR. CHAIRMAN, Morris McGregor (Virden): I call the committee to order. We're on Page 84, Labour and Manpower 1.(c)(1). The Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

Over the weekend I had an opportunity to go through the document which the Minister had tabled respecting the Province of Manitoba's contribution to the Canadian Plan of Action for Women, and a number of questions have arisen from that initial reading of the document. I'd like to ask the Minister if he can provide us with some details on the special employment action measures which are first mentioned on page 3 of the document and then are mentioned further along in the document in other areas. To be specific, I would ask the Minister if he 978

Monday, 23 February, 1981 can indicate if it is the intention of his government to bring in legislation which will in fact, bring domestics under the provisions of existing legislation, such as The Employment Standards Act and other Acts which they are currently excluded from by definition. The report indicates that this is a concern of the government, it is also a concern of most Manitobans, I am certain.

There is always some question as to why they were excluded in the first place, although in my analysis of the situation it has been suggested that the provincial exclusion came about as a result of a federal exclusion in respect to unemployment insurance and other areas of federal jurisdiction. However, I think the time is such that we should be able to, in this day and age, bring forward the type of legislation which would, in fact, bring these domestics and other persons, by the way, who are excluded from different Acts by definition under the provisions of the Act.

So I commend the Minister on the initiative, or at least on the intention that was shown in the plan of action, but I would hope that he could be more specific as to what actual measures have been put in place to deal with this problem. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. MR. MacMASTER: Mr.

Chairman, I think it would be simpler - I've got the question of what variety of things we are doing as it relates to opportunities for women; I will get some document and give it to the member because it flows through many departments and flows through many sections of Labour and Manpower and so I can get that precise document for him on that.

As far as the domestics go we're probably ahead of, I believe, every other province in Canada, as we understand, it from the federal scene anyway, in reaching an understanding and agreement with the Federal Government where in fact there will be at least an agreement in place between domestics and their employers and in fact a system, some method, in place, where the provincial's jurisdiction will be aware of the vocation and the conditions and the wages that are being paid to domestics in our province, something that is not in place today, I don't think in any jurisdiction in the country.

We think we're pretty close to having something in place and agreed to by all parties. Once we do, we think it will be a standard that may be accepted, according to the federal side of things, may be accepted hopefully by other provinces across the country. MR. COWAN: Is the Minister speaking to the specific of a contract, which if I understand the situation correctly, would be one that would be settled between the Federal Government through the Ministry of Immigration and the Provincial Government through the Ministry of Labour and Manpower?

The question that I had directed to him however, was one of removing legislative barriers to protection for domestics and others who are currently barred from enjoying many of the legislative benefits which arise from a number of Acts because of exclusion by definition. It's a fairly straightforward amendment that would be necessary if the Minister were indeed to proceed along that course of action, and I would suggest that is most likely the proper course of action, notwithstanding any supplementary actions which may be taken in regard to

definitions and implementation of the contracts between domestics and employers. It is important that we bring them, at least I believe that it is important that we bring them under the provisions of legislation. Perhaps the Minister can indicate to us if that is an intention on the part of his department and if so if we can expect that type of legislation in the near future. At the same time if it is not, perhaps the Minister can elaborate as to why they have chosen a non-legislative mechanism when the legislative mechanism appears to be a relatively easy one to implement. MR. MacMASTER: Mr.

Chairman, I think that the inclusion of that particular group of the work force at this time is not appropriate at this particular time until we do have the amount of input that we have had to date into drafting an agreement or a contract, if you wish, that will be acceptable to all parties. That in itself will include - it will be representative of some legislation that's in place. I think that is necessarily the first step and at a later date it could quite conceivably be that these people would then be included in the existing legislation. MR.

COWAN: If I can point out to the Minister, and I will read from Manitoba's contribution to the Canadian Plan of Action, the

interpretation of the problem by the persons who put together that policy statement and what it says, and I'm quoting, "Domestic and homemakers are another group that sometimes experience labour problems as they are not covered by The Employee Standards Act. Large numbers in domestic occupations have no protection with respect to minimum wage, vacation, and hours of work." I would suggest to him that there are also other Acts that currently exist in which there is no provision for protection for domestics and other groups.

The Minister has indicated to us, if I interpret his remarks correctly, that it is not the intention of the government to bring those persons under those Acts and provide them with that legislative protection. The question to him quite simply then is, why has he chosen to go a non-legislative route in respect to this necessary action at the expense of the legislative route? What barriers does he see that would prevent them from pursuing the providing protection to these people legislatively? MR. MacMASTER: Mr.

Chairman, I think the document that the member is reading from makes reference to a future consideration by our government and I have not ruled out in any way that will not be a future consideration, but we have to, in our opinion, get something in place as quickly as possible to deal with the domestic situation as it is today. We have to attempt to work out something with the Federal Government so we are aware of those that are coming in and under what conditions they are going to be working. And that, at this moment, is the first step towards achieving the ultimate, which is in the document he's reading from.

MR. COWAN: I don't think it should be necessary to point out to the Minister that not all domestics are immigrants, that there are large numbers of domestics who are low paid workers, who are working without the provisions of legislative protection, and who are from this very province, so 979

Monday, 23 February, 1981 in fact if the Minister is going to set a contract procedure up that would be used for the purpose of ensuring some protection for those workers by contract between themselves and the employer, and the different levels of government, he will in fact, not be doing anything for those large numbers of domestics who are native born or who are already citizens of Canada and therefore would not show up on any immigration rolls, would not be dealt with by the Immigration Department.

The only way in which to provide those persons with protection is, to my way of thinking, by legislation, and the legislation is a very simple matter. It just strikes from the definition of certain Acts, the exclusion of domestics. It's not difficult legislation to draft, one would think that we would want to offer legislative protection of this sort, such as minimum wage protection, vacation protection, hours of work protection, to all our workers, and I might add that I believe it would go so far as Workers Compensation.

I believe they are restricted from collecting Workers Compensation because of an exclusion from the Act. So I would ask the Minister, what action he will be taking, or his department or government will be taking in respect to providing those persons who are non-immigrants, yet domestics, some protection under the law. MR. CHAIRMAN: (1)- the Honourable Minister. MR. MacMASTER: I guess the Member for Churchill didn't follow my words or I didn't give him the right words. When we're talking about an agreement for domestics, we're talking about all domestics. MR.

COWAN: How would then the Minister determine where domestics would be working in the province so that an agreement could be written up? It would seem to me that it would be a much easier course of action just to say that they are provided with protection under the law and therefore they have recourse through the department to redress grievances which they may have and that it would be up to them to make those grievances known to the department, rather than, in every instance, to set up a contract. That seems to be a bulky and unwieldy way to deal with a very simple problem.

So the question to the Minister, specifically is, how will they determine where domestics are currently working and where domestics will be working, because not all domestics are hired through employment agencies or domestic services; many are hired privately. Not all domestics are immigrants; many are from the province. So the fact is that without what would appear to be at first glance, an overwhelming bureaucracy, it would be impossible to effectively monitor where those domestics are employed.

So when a domestic then does have a problem in respect to wages, vacation or working hours, hours of work or a problem in respect to Workers Compensation, they could simply notify the Employment Standards Division of that problem, as does the thousands of other workers in this province, or as do, excuse me, thousands of other workers in this province, and the matter would be dealt with in the most expedient way possible. You have the bureaucracy in place to deal with those already, it's just a simple matter of carrying on the number of cases that would originate out of the domestic sector of the work force.

So can the Minister indicate where it is, how it is that he expects to be able to maintain a running list of where domestics are employed so that contracts can be written out and distributed? MR. MacMASTER: That's part of the work that this Committee is doing in conjunction with the Federal Government today. The member is quite correct; there are a lot of domestics that we will never know anything about and a lot of them for a good reason, they don't want to be known about; they don't want anybody to know about them. They have a private sort of an arrangement and a lot of them are very very pleased with that.

That's part of the reason why no other government in the history of the provinces has brought them under that particular legislation. MR. COWAN: Is this Minister then condoning this private sort of agreement if it in fact does not meet the minimum standards for other workers in the province? MR. MacMASTER: I am not aware of the private agreements that are in place, but I know that there are people who make their own arrangements with others to work in their house for a short period of time.

We're all aware of individuals that do that and by and large they are reasonably pleased with getting in and making a few dollars and getting out. MR. COWAN: So it does not concern the Minister that they may not be afforded the benefits of all the other workers in the province in respect to minimum wage, in respect to holidays, in respect to notice of termination, and in respect to hours of work; that they have no legislative recourse whatsoever, because they have chosen to make a private sort of agreement with their employer.

If I might, I would suggest to the Minister that he would not allow that under any other circumstance. You can't make a private sort of agreement that in fact denies you the basic rights of all workers in this province in any other industry, unless it is specifically provided for in the legislation. An example, a worker in this province is entitled to notice of termination, however, at the time of hiring they can sign away part of that requirement but they do so voluntarily with the employer. The fact is that they don't have to sign away.

The fact is that they might sign away and that is a provision that is specifically provided for by that Act, but when it comes to minimum wage nobody can sign away their right to the minimum wage unless it's by Ministerial permit in respect to the employment of handicapped and disadvantaged persons. So what the Minister is saying - that there are two sets of rules in place - one for domestics and other groups which don't come under the different Acts and another set for the entire industrial work force; not industrial work force. I suppose that's too specific, the entire work force.

Can the Minister seriously condone that sort of double standard in respect to work done by domestics? MR. MacMASTER: Without saying that the people are not getting the appropriate sort of coverages, because it hasn't specifically been brought to my 980

Monday, 23 February, 1981 attention that people aren't. I'm just saying that governments of all stripes in this province as in other provinces have permitted original specific personal arrangements to be made. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MS. WESTBURY: Mr. Chair, I wonder, is this where we would ask about the Advisory Council on the Status of Women, or do you want to talk about that later on, or has that already been discussed? MR. MacMASTER: It's already been dealt with, Mr. Chairman. MS. WESTBURY: Will we be rece1vmg an annual report showing their recommendations? We will be? . . .

Okay, thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(c)(1)- the Member for Logan. MR. JENKINS: Mr. Chairman, just to carry on with some of the questions that my colleague, the Member for Churchill has raised, I find it kind of ludicrous that the Minister is in consultation with the federal authority, and yet we have not at this time from the Minister, found out if he has ascertained how many people are employed in the domestic services field in this province. It's all very well and good to strike off committees, but do we know how many people are employed at the present time?

I haven't heard anything from the Minister and I can tell the Minister, just looking through the legislation that is administered by the Department of Labour and Manpower, I can pick out about nine Acts where these people would, if they were covered by labour legislation in this province, where there is some coverage for them, plus the fact also, Mr. Chairman, that there are some specifics of federal legislation that perhaps should be covered too, and I realize that's a federal responsibility.

I'm talking, for instance, of Canada Pension Plan payments, Unemployment Insurance Commission payments, there are perhaps income tax payments. Now what we're dealing with here seems to be, Mr. Chairman, a void in the whole field of domestic services. Are there any contracts filed anywhere? From what I understand the Minister to have said, there is nothing on file in the department; we're working practically from scratch.

It's all very well and good for the Minister to say, well, governments of various political stripes in the past haven't done anything about it, but more and more in the latter years, we are finding out and hearing more and more people are being victimized, especially when we are dealing with people who come from outside this country, come here on work permits. Those, I can understand that there is some way of checking, but as the Member for Churchill has already stated, what do we do with those that are native born or come in from other provinces in this country that are Canadian citizens.

It's kind of funny that the Minister is now engaged in conferences with the Federal Minister, but by the same token, he doesn't even have any information on the people that are in the domestic service work force here in the Province of Manitoba. How does he reconcile the fact that he's going to be negotiating something on behalf of people when he doesn't even know how many he has in that field in the Province of Manitoba?

I realize that the Minister doesn't have access to federal income tax payments, unemployment insurance, Canada Pension plan payments that are there, but I think those are some of the things that the Minister should be raising. I think also the Workplace Safety and Health Act, there are many hazards around the home, many of the accidents that we read about do take place in the home. And there's no coverage for these people under that Act. There's no coverage for them if they are injured in a home environment accident under Workers Compensation. Just where do they fit into that field?

Do they then become a responsibility of the province or just what is the coverage that these people can expecthat present time; recovery of wages is another one. Suppose the employer says he's not going to pay them any more. There is no contract in force. I imagine many of them - there is no legally signed contract in force, it's just perhaps word-of-mouth and a handshake. So the Minister, to set up the bureaucratic system that he's going to do by having . . . is he telling us that in conjunction with his federal counterparts that they are going to set up contracts for every domestic in this province?

My God, I don't know how many people - I won't even hazard a guess how many people are employed in domestic services here in the Province of Manitoba but I imagine it's a considerable number. To set up this type of a contract system is certainly going to be a bureaucratic headache that the Minister, I'm sure, and his department are really not prepared to deal with. As my colleague has said, the simplest method of dealing with this is to include these people within the Acts under this province that every other worker - these people are workers just as well as anyone else in this province.

I think that they are entitled to protection under the Workplace Safety and Health Act. I think they are also entitled to vacations with pay. I think they are entitled to pension benefits. How many of them are covered under any type of a pension benefit with their employer? That's another - they're not covered under The Labour Relations Act.

They are not covered under The Employment Standards Act for the recovery of wages, and I know that the mess that we're in at the present time under The Employment Standards Act and The Payment of Wages Act, is that these people stand way down the line when it comes to collecting the money that is owing them, but I don't know what the Minister has in place even to pay these people if they can't recover their wages.

I think that the Minister should take a very good hard look at where he's going and rather than set up the machinery that is going to be required to process - I don't know, maybe hundreds, maybe thousands of contracts. I'm sure the Minister can't tell me at this time how many are employed in domestic services in Manitoba. If he can, I'll be quite pleased to hear him, but I think, Mr. Chairman, to just say that we're looking at this thing, and governments of political stripes in the past have not dealt with it, and also the province provides domestics for help for the elderly. Are these people covered?

What Acts are they covered under? These are people that are employed by the Province of Manitoba. Are they 981

Monday, 23 February, 1981 there as civil servants, are they there as casuals, or just what coverage and what protection do they have under the Acts that are administered by the Minister of Labour and Manpower in this province? MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. I don't want to belabour the point.

I imagine we'll have other opportunities to talk about it, and I do sympathize with the Minister when he says that is an area that has been neglected for quite some time, not only by his government, but I might suggest that our government was less than forceful in response to the problem, however, I believe we did make some attempts as I believe the Minister is making some attempts in order to deal with the problem.

I'm not trying to cast a finger of blame in any respect, I'm just trying to point out that it's a very serious situation and use what pursuasive powers we may have in order to encourage a Minister to come foreward with this as quickly as possible; legislation that would provide protection to domestics, all domestics in this Province. The Minister indicated that he felt that through co operation with the Department of Immigration that they would be able to bring forward a method of contractual agreements that would deal with many of the problems.

Indeed, they would be able to bring forward some contractual agreements to deal with the numbers of immigrants who are working under permits in the province, in that respect I mean foreign domestics, and my figures which are about two years out of date indicate at that time there were 220 to 235 foreign domestics working under permits in the Province of Manitoba.

And the procedure for a foreign domestic for being allowed into the country, initiated with an offer of employment by an individual to the Department, that's Department of Immigration, for the purpose of bringing that worker into the country for work as a domestic. At that point, and this is a couple of years ago, an agreement was drawn up between the individual and the department as to the terms and conditions of work. As mid-January of two years ago the department was insisting that a base wage of $3.15 an hour with time and-a-half for over forty hours be the wages.

That applied to Manitoba at that time, it was supposed to be a national policy in six months. I'm not certain whether they went ahead with it or not. That contract also allowed the employer, by the way, to deduct a maximum of $125 a month for room and board from the salary of any domestic, so it not only dealt with the amount of money which was paid them, it in fact dealt with the amount of money which was to be deducted from their wages for services rendered to them.

The other particulars of the contract, could include the hours of work, the job description, and the length of employment, but they didn't have to include those, that was part of the contract that could be written up. So this system of a contract has been around for a long time. There are difficulties with it, as the Minister is aware, that it is not the same as legislative protection.

It is a contract, and what would happen if the contract were to be violated, the Department of Immigration would attempt to bring the parties together and they may find it necessary to terminate the domestic's employment, and place the domestic into another domicile which, in fact, does not provide the type of recource which legislation would.

If one of the parties that had signed that contract had been judged to flagrantly abuse the offer of employment in the beginning, then the Department of Immigration reserved the right not to approve further applications by those parties, so that system, while it does attempt to deal with anywhere from 200 to 300 foreign domestic workers in the province is in itself inadequate, I would suggest, and does nothing for the domestics who originate from the province or from Canada.

The Minister is absolutely correct when he says that the legislation in other provinces is similar to Manitoba in respect to its exclusion of domestics from various Acts. However, I don't know whether I heard him correctly or not when he said that there was no other province that included domestics under their provincial legislation.

If that was the case and I'm not saying he said that, I'm saying that's what I think he might have said, I'd only point out to him that the domestic workers are included in The Employment Standards Act of Quebec, Newfoundland, and Prince Edward Island, according to my information and that's just The Employment Standards Act. They are also included in other Acts which they are excluded from in Manitoba. So the situation is not as simplistic as he would have us believe or it's not as clear-cut as he would have us believe. There are other jurisdictions who have attempted to deal with it by legislation.

He is right that we were unable to, and I was not a party to that caucus, but I don't walk away from their decisions. I don't know exactly why it was that we were unable to. At that time I think there were difficulties in respect to exclusions under The Federal Act, and we were just following along. Since that time it's my understanding that difficulty has been dealt with, but I think it is obvious that repealing the exclusion of domestics from the Act which they are excluded from in Manitoba is necessary to correct several anomalies created by the exlusions.

Number one, there can be little justification for singling out a specific segment of the economic society in this manner so as to have the effect of allowing certain employers special powers over their employees. I would hope that the Minister would agree with me that by not bringing these persons under the provisions of legislation, he is in fact allowing certain employers in this province to have extraordinary powers over their employees. It is a system that is difficult to understand the justification for that, but that is exactly the effect that the exclusions create.

Employees following under the Acts, other employees falling under the Acts, have recourse to be assisted by employers that are not available to employees that are excluded from the Acts. In a specific example of The Human Rights Act, this is particularly repugnant, unjustifiable, and that's another area where this issue has to be addressed and I think that as the previous government, we have to take full responsibility for that and I'm not trying to fault one government or another, I'm just saying that all governments to date, have failed to act in respect to providing this sort of legislative protection.

There's also a less obvious inequity that results as a direct effective exclusion to domestics within the 982

Monday, 23 February, 1981 Legislative Acts and that's foreign domestics that are brought in by their offer of employment and they sign that offer of employment, that contractual agreement which the Minister has made reference, have some protection afforded to them by that offer of employment. Canadian domestics do not enjoy the same protection.

The result by the way, of this, is that there is a tendency for Canadian domestics to be less likely to enter the domestic sector and once entered, to stay in the domestic sector because they can find Legislative protection afforded to them in other workplace sectors or other industrial sectors that they cannot enjoy within the domestic sector. The fact is that the non-Canadian, the foreign domestic, has some protection and so that would not be as much a factor with them.

The actual changes in legislation that would be necessary to effect the inclusion of domestics within the various Acts is minimal, but their impact could in fact be substantial. There is the argument, of course, that changes can be made but because of the nature of working conditions, and in a case of many disputes, that would be difficult to monitor; It would be a matter of one person's word against another person. Well, that may in fact be an argument that has been used in the past against the inclusion of domestics into Legislative Acts.

However, I would suggest that the Minister's methodology will create far more problems in respect to that specific area of concern than would inclusion in the Act.

What it would do basically is when a dispute did arise, there would be some legal recourse to it and that, I think, is a protection which is necessary to all workers and I would hope that the Minister will give due consideration to when dealing with this problem and will not rely entirely upon a contractual system which, I believe, we have pointed out has serious deficiencies, so I'm saying that not to suggest that they have been any different from any other government and therefore, should be chastised for that; it is not my place.

I'm just saying that many governments have failed to deal adequately with this and I would hope that their government would be one that would bring forward the type of legislation that would deal with the problem. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Rouge. MS. WESTBURY: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you to the Minister, last year in response to some questions I raised, the Minister said the Women's Bureau has been in touch with the Human Rights Commission in Manitoba with a series of meetings arranged as it relates to sex harassment.

I wonder whether those meetings are continuing or whether the Women's Bureau has perhaps provided civil servants with some avenue of appeal or an ombudsman type situation where they can appeal where they feel that they are the victims of sexual harassment, or if Miss Bradshaw can give us any information on that at all. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister. MR. MacMASTER: Mr.

Chairman, the Women's Bureau certainly advises women who complain to them about alleged, and I'll use that word until it's determined, certainly alleged sexual harassment, they refer them to the Human Rights Commission and that's basically what is taking place today. MS. WESTBURY: Mr.

Chair, I wonder if any consideration has been given to some kind of educational program through the Women's Bureau or developed through the Women's Bureau to inform possible victims and possible perpetrators also of what can be considered to be sexual harassment since we are told that some people who some of us feel are sexually harassing really feel they're doing what's expected of them as employers or executives or senior members of staff.

I think that it could perhaps circumvent some of the problems that do arise in view of the fact that women now are aware that they no longer have to submit to the kinds of sexual overtures that women in the past have had to submit to or else give up their jobs. I don't know if you've given this any thought, Mr. Minister - you have - whether anything has been developed but I think that could be. You could perhaps provide leadership to others in the province as well as protect both those making accusations and those being accused against. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, I should have read the bottom line.

I knew that there was some work being done on it. The Women's Bureau in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission are putting out a brochure, of which I'm sure there's going to be hundreds if not thousands distributed throughout the Province of Manitoba as it relates to sexual harassment. It will be going to both employees and employers, and I think it's important that employers as well as employees know really what it's all about before the employer finds himself or herself in trouble and isn't really aware of the problem. There is a brochure being put together now; we expect it very shortly.

I'll make sure that the Member for Fort Rouge gets one of the first ones off the press to let her view it. MS. WESTBURY: Mr. Chair, I thank the Minister for that, and I want to congratulate the Women's Bureau on taking that step because as has been suggested by the Minister, I think it is important that everybody understand just what is intended in the expression "sexual harassment," so thank you for that. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(c)(1) - pass; 1.(c) - the Member for Churchill. MR.

COWAN: Yes, on 1.(cX2l if the Minister can just provide us at some time within the next couple of days with a list of the Other Expenditures, we would be appreciative. It's not necessary to take up the time of committee in outlining them, if he want's to provide it in written form.

However, I would like to talk about the advertising campaign that was discussed last year under this particular item, and ask him if its ongoing; what the success rate has been in respect to it; do they feel that it has provided the service for which it was intended to provide, and specifically, if they have done any analysis as to the effectiveness of the campaign. MR. MacMASTER: Certainly the advertisements have had a very positive affect and we will be 983

Monday, 23 February, 1981 carrying on with the Transit ads and ads for various seminars. We think that it's doing an adequate job. I suppose always more could be done but the Women's Bureau is pleased with responses that we are receiving and when they do talk to people they precisely say, how did you hear of us, where did you hear of us, and a lot of it now with the activity that's taken place throughout the province, and they have been speaking and holding seminars all over the province. The word is pretty well spread throughout the Province of Manitoba that we do have a Women's Bureau and it's very accessible.

The advertising, I guess, sort of puts the frosting on the cake to it, that others are becoming more aware. I guess the best advertisement in the world is once you are well enough established is word-of-mouth, and I think they are well enough established now that there is a tremendous amount of word-of-mouth about how well they're doing, and that in fact is working very well, the advertisement program, and it is Transit and ads for seminars that will be taking place this year. MR. COWAN: Yes, I notice that the Transit ads have a tear-off provided on the ad.

I would ask the Minister if he could indicate what sort of response they are getting in respect to those tear-off applications for assistance from the Women's Bureau. MR. MacMASTER: It is having a good degree of success. We are trying to evaluate and analyze it through our research department, just trying to get the precise answers that the member has talked about, really, how did you come to know of the Women's Bureau, and an analysis like that, as the member will appreciate, takes a long time to get a good cross

section of people, so that the numbers are somewhat meaningful rather than just a quick spurt of figures and numbers over the course of a period of a month. MR. COWAN: The Minister had indicated the other day when discussing Estimates that he would try to find out why it was that the Occupational Health and Safety Survey was not completed in regards to the specifics of why it wasn't completed. I would ask him if he has any more information concerning that matter which he had promised to get back to us on. MR.

MacMASTER: The Women's Bureau were pulling together bits and pieces, which I said to the member I'd have a look at, and that's all it is, is bits and pieces. There is nothing complete in that whatsoever and it certainly doesn't reflect any facts or figures today. All I can simply say is I guess they got on with other things and just did not complete that in any great detail at all. MR.

COWAN: As it is an area of major concern, I would ask the Minister if he is intending to direct the Bureau to attempt that type of survey once again, and if so, when we could expect the results, or have they in fact given up on providing a detailed analysis of some of the problems which face women in specific in respect to workplace safety and health hazards. MR. MacMASTER: They haven't given up on it specifically but there isn't a specific study that's going to take place this year.

That is, I think, as bottom line as the member would want rather than a whole bunch of chit-chat about the other odds and ends and things they are doing as it relates to it. MR. COWAN: Again, we can only encourage the Minister to provide as much priority to that area as is possible because it is an area of great concern, I know, to him and as well to the Bureau and others who must face those hazards on a day-to-day basis.

In respect to the mailings which go out from the department from this Bureau, I would ask the Minister if there is a standard mailing list which the department uses to ensure that all of their information is getting out to those persons who are most interested in receiving it. MR. MacMASTER: I'll produce that list for the member, Mr. Chairman. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I thank the Minister for that commitment which he had given to us in respect to other lists as well, and I hope that we can provide him with some of the names and contacts which we have developed which may be able to increase the effectiveness and the efficiency of mailing lists. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1.(c)(2) - pass; 2.(a)(1) - pass - the Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: We're on the Workplace Safety and Health Division now. I would hope that the Minister would be able to provide us with the background information which he has provided to us in the past respecting the staffing levels and activities of this division. MR.

MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, just a statement covering, in general, the responsibilities of that particular division. The Workplace Safety and Health Branch is responsible for administration of The Workplace Safety and Health Act and its regulations. The objectives of the branch are the elimination of worker exposure to hazards in the workplace, a strengthening of the individual's ability to recognize and avoid risks through educational guidance and the creation of positive attitudes towards safety and health concerns in the workplace. The branch is divided into five basic sections to accomplish these objectives.

The administrative section, responsible for overall direction of the branch; the safety and health inspection sE!ction carries out daily inspections of workplaces, issues improvement orders and assists in the training of labour and management in safety and health matters. The educational services

section conducts regular seminars covering all aspects of safety and health in the workplaces throughout Manitoba. This includes safety and health committee workshops to assist in their formation and development. The industrial hygiene

section monitors and evaluates workplaces to ensure a healthy environment. A hearing conservation program is being developed and investigations are underway on the use of carcinogens and hazardous chemicals in the workplace. The asbestos program is also continuing in an effort to control this hazarad. The occupational medicine

section acts as a medical authority under The Workplace Safety and 984

Monday, 23 February, 1981 Health Act. It continues to administer the silicosis regulations and consults with industrial physicians and workers. Safety and health bulletins are now being distributed to workplaces and a safety newspaper is under development. Recently 162 workplaces were added to the original designated list of workplaces required to form safety committees, with the removal of 40 workplaces from the requirement, a total of 438 workplaces now require safety committees. Regulation review and development is also continuing on a regular basis. As far as staff goes, Mr.

Chairman, last year there was 45.23 staff man years and for 1981-82 we are requesting 49.23, an increase of four staff man years. Additional staff, one will be responsible for an educational program and other safety and health activities for the agricultural industry. The second SMY will be to assist in developing and implementing of a carcinogen program and to follow up in programs or carcinogen identification in industry.

One is to provide clerical assistance in administrative matters to the branch resulting from increased workload of additional programs, and another SMY to provide for an Executive Director for the entire branch. MR. COWAN: I wonder if the Minister could be more specific as to the duties of the Executive Director for the branch? MR. MacMASTER: The Executive Director will be the person entirely responsible for the entire division.

There was a recommendation out of the Claude Wright Report on mining that a senior person, they call it an ADM, at this particular moment we're calling it Executive Director, which in fact could work into an ADM soon, or later. That position is what's being requested in these Estimates. MR. COWAN: Could the Minister be more specific as to the duties of that individual. How will that individual relate to the present director of the branch?

Will it be a position that is higher and therefore has responsibility for the present director of the branch, or will it be a position that is on the same plane, or one that is of a lesser responsibility? MR. MacMASTER: Certainly an Executive Director of a division runs a division, the entire division and everybody in it; has similarities and categories to an ADM. MR. COW AN: And what will happen to the present position of Director of the branch? MR.-MacMASTER: Not a thing, Mr. Chairman. MR. COWAN: So that position will, in fact, remain as is.

There will be an Executive Director of the branch imposed on top of that position. Does the Minister expect to bulletin that position, and if so, when should we anticipate those bulletins to go forward? MR. MacMASTER: Executive Directors and ADM positions can or cannot be bulletined. I haven't given any thought at this particular moment, I'm more interested in going through my Estimates than I am in how that particular position will be filled. MR. COWAN: Can the Minister give us any indication as to when he expects to fill it? MR.

MacMASTER: When the Estimates are completed and I suppose technically, we could have started advertising or we could have started looking or we could have started sending out enquiries, we could have done a variety of things, but I like to, by and large, finish my Estimates before we go for filling positions. I said it before to the Member for Churchill and others that I do not ask for positions I do not intend to fill, and fill as rapidly as possible.

There's nothing been requested within my Labour and Manpower division Estimates for additional SMYs that I do not think is needed immediately or they wouldn't be there. MR. COWAN: Which leads us to the question to the Minister and that is, how many of those positions are currently vacant? MR. MacMASTER: Could the member ask another question? I'll get back on that. I think it's only one or two and if it is it's in transit sort of thing; there are no positions. Again, the old practice for years in Manitoba wa,s positions not funded.

There's none of that kind of thing and if in fact there is a vacancy and quite possibly there is one, it would be filled, or in the process of being filled. MR. COWAN: I would ask the Minister, and beg his indulgence in this manner, because I think we've done it in the past. I'd like to read down a list of positions which I have that were presently in the branch and ask him if those positions are filled, and if those positions are still there and then ask him to indicate by specific title the new positions that are added.

It's a fairly arduous procedure and this is the only department on which I will ask him to go through that procedure with me, but I think it is important that we have a full understanding of where the employees are employed in this particular branch. One is the Director of course, still employed, this is for the past year and the previous year or the year coming up, excuse me, a medical consultant - is there still a medical consultant in the branch? One? MR. MacMASTER: I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if as the member is reading them off I can just signify at the point where there is one vacancy.

Let me give the member some information on his list. There is one vacancy at the moment and it's one of the inspectors in Brandon that's vacant. When he gets down to clerks, we wish to add one. When he gets down to carcinogen program officers, we wish to add one, and the two outside that of course are the two 1 mentioned; one to work with the agricultural community in the province and the executive director.

I think he'll find that his list and mine are virtually identical if he adds one to the clerks, adds one to the carcinogen program, adds an executive director and an agricultural person on the outside of his list, and if he takes note that there is one vacancy momentarily in Brandon, our lists are probably fairly identical. MR. COWAN: That would give us how many Safety and Health officers in total, counting the vacancy, assuming that's going to be filled in the near future? 985

Monday, 23 February, 1981 MR. MacMASTER: Twenty-three. MR. COWAN: And that would compare to how many last year? MR. MacMASTER: There were 22 last year. We've taken one out of administration and put it in as an inspector. We changed the position, so we have now 23, but virtually the same number over all, except there was a shift of one SMY; not a person, an SMY. MR. COWAN: Maybe we could just read through the list because there's been some shifting and I know it's a bit time consuming, it would probably take five minutes, but if the Minister can just nod as we go through it and I can fill in my sheets.

Medical Consultant we already went over; Occupational Health Nurse - I have down one for last year, one for this year; Occupational Health Nurse Consultant - is there one for last year, one for this year on that? The last time I show that in my figures is 1978. It may have not gone beyond that - it was beyond - okay; Head Industrial Hygiene, one, last year, this year; Industrial Hygiene Chemist, I had four as of 1979 - four and four, still the same; Technologists for Industrial Hygiene - I had two as of 1979. MR. MacMASTER: I think the titles are changed.

We have an Industrial Hygiene Laboratory Supervisor, and then we have an Industrial Hygiene Technologist, and then we have three Industrial Hygienists. So I think we're probably talking about the same numbers but maybe slightly different titles. MR. COWAN: And then the Lab Chemist - one, one; Training and Education Consultant - the last time I show that is for 1979. It may not exist. MR. MacMASTER: I have three Training Officers. MR. COWAN: Three Training Officers. MR. MacMASTER: . . . and a head of Education Services, so we are probably again talking about the same things but I have different titles here. MR.

COWAN: It would be four in total then? MR. MacMASTER: Yes, they have been upgraded, retitled, reclassified. MR. COWAN: Senior Construction Consultant - again 1979 is the last year. Is that still there - one, and one? Industrial Consultant? MR. MacMASTER: They're supervisors now, Jay. MR. COWAN: General Consultant is no longer there; Education Officer? MR. MacMASTER: We call it Head of Education. MR. COWAN: Head of Education- one? MR. MacMASTER: Yes. MR. COWAN: Research Officer? MR. MacMASTER: It's not under that title. MR. COWAN: Okay. Director of Occupational Medicine, is that position still vacant?

It was as of a couple of months ago, because I ran across a problem in respect to the duties of that officer and which I'll be discussing with the Minister in more detail, but I just assume that it is still vacant. MR. MacMASTER: I don't know what title the member is using, Mr. Chairman, but there is only one vacancy as I've said. Now we have a Medical Consultant so maybe that's called what you titled it. MR. COWAN: There is a fine difference between the Medical Consultant and Director of Occupational Medicine and I'm certain we will discuss it in more detail; we have discussed it in the past.

It's a situation that the Minister has indicated to us he was going to deal with by appointing a Director of Occupational Medicine. The assumption was that when that happened, the Occupational Medical Consultant's position would be redundant and therefore no more but that the person occupying that position or whoever was appointed as Director of Occupational Medicine would have powers under the Act which are not available to a Medical Consultant. I think perhaps it might be better to get into that discussion after having gone through. Is there any change in clerical staff from the eight from last year? MR.

MacMASTER: Six plus one Administration Officer which gives us seven, and we're asking for an additional one this year which would give us eight. Now I don't think you would call the Administration Officer clerical but it's an administrative type of service. MR. COWAN: I thank the Minister for going through that list with me.

It's very difficult because from time to time I know the department finds it necessary to shift positions and to shift people to meet needs and no one denies that is not a legitimate response to different needs and therefore we're willing to put up with a bit of the difficulty in determining exactly where the staff are. But the fact is that since 1977 when this division was first formed, we have not seen that substantial an increase in the staff. That year it was at 42.

Now the Minister will say that there were some funded and some unfunded, and I am not certain as to exactly how many were funded and how many were unfunded, but it was anticipated that 42 persons would work in that division, and that was the first year. One would hope that as the division was able to acquaint itself with the problems and was able to become more familiar with what was needed to be done that it would be able to add staff to meet those different problems. What we see is over a course of four or five years now a total of only -seven staff added.

I'm not saying that staff should be added for the sake of building a bureaucracy, or staff should be added for the sake of adding staff alone, but I think that it is an area of great need.

Perhaps it is the area of greatest need for the Minister, and that is the whole area of Workplace Safety and Health, and for that reason we would always support it and we have always encouraged and prodded and pushed for more staff to do more work so that we could in fact deal with some of the many problems that affect workers today in respect to occupational hazards and unsafe conditions more efficiently and more effectively. 986

Monday, 23 February, 1981 The Minister indicated that we could expect the Workers Compensation Board Report, I believe it was today, although he did not give us a firm commitment to provide it to us today. I would hope he would be able to provide us with some information as to when we can expect that, because it does make a difference as to our deliberations in this particular department. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, I didn't say I would have the Workers Compensation Board review report today, I said that I had hoped to have the Cam Maclean Committee Report today, and I expect to have that.

It's apparently coming from the printers today and will be printed and given to myself. The member had asked if I would give him a copy of the draft that I haven't seen that's gone to the printers on the Lampe Report and I don't think it's appropriate that I do that. MR. COWAN: I can certainly accept that it is most likely inappropriate to do that, however, I'm certain the Minister will certainly accept my asking for it, and I thank him for taking it under consideration.

But I would ask the Minister, not the review report, but for the Workers Compensation Board report, their annual report, which in fact lists the number of accidents which were encountered by workers and reported to Workers Compensation over the past year in the different areas, and it is extremely important to us to be able to tell whether or not in fact the workplaces are becoming safer and are becoming healthier and it's only through that report that we can get the many statistics that are necessary for us to make the statistical comparisons. Perhaps he can indicate when we can expect that. MR.

MacMASTER: I excuse myself for making reference to the two other reports. I've got one of my staff going now to phone the Workers Compensation Board to find out when in fact precisely I'll be in a position to table that report in the House. I don't know what the legislative authority is, I just have to say I'm not sure where it's at. MR. COWAN: I'm certain, given the bill that we passed earlier in the year, and one which I spoke against for exactly this reason, that the Minister has a legislative authority not to table that report.

I'm not saying he's doing that intentionally, it's just that there is no legislative authority to make him table that report, given that bill, however it would be extremely helpful to us.

But without that report I can suggest that we are going to find that accidents either increased last year over the year before or if they did not increase they are very close to what they were in the previous year and there are all sorts of factors which have to be taken into consideration as to the number of workers, the number of hours worked, and I think once we do that we will find that there has been very little change, and if there has been any change at all, it's probably an upward change in respect to accidents. The Minister has, I note, been handed something by his staff.

I would ask him if that is a run-down on the accidents that were reported to Workers Compensation last year? MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, I don't intend to tell the Member for Churchill every piece of document that's handed to me by the staff, but I can tell him that of the three provinces that we did review as far as staffing numbers went, in Alberta there were 224 people associated with Workplace Safety; in Saskatchewan there's 41, including the mining sector; and in Manitoba there's 67, including, if you wish, the mining sector. MR.

COWAN: I thank the Minister for the information on staffing in other provinces, but the question I was asking was in respect to accidents reported to Workers Compensation Board. He doesn't have that, he indicates. I know there was a report that went out which brought us up to December, but did not include the month of December and therefore we can't use it as an accurate comparison, but it showed that the accident rates were not changing very much at all.

The reason I bring that up is that I think it is important that we constantly and consistently check the effectiveness of this branch by reviewing the number of accidents, where they are happening, the length of those accidents, the duration of the disabilities, if disabilities are encountered, so that we have an overall view of where we have to provide the greatest assistance and where we have to priorize in respect to the branch's activities. I know the Minister is aware of the problem that toxic substances represent to workers in this province.

We knew that last year when he indicated that they were bringing forward a carcinogen control program. I would ask the Minister if he can provide us with some information as to the activities of those persons employed under that particular program and following that, the activities of those persons employed under the noise control program, which was another special program mentioned in last year's Throne Speech. MR.

MacMASTER: As it relates to the hearing program or noise, whichever he wishes to refer to, we would hope in the not too distant future to have not only have it reviewed, which has become a very difficult process, but we hope to have some regulations in shape. They are being formulated in a variety of ways right now and in fact, I would think there is a good possibility, before the House is out, that regulations as it relates to the hearing program initially will be put toward by myself. On the carcinogen situation it's been a very difficult year and there has been a great amount of work done.

Basically we have been trying to review the major sources of research on industrial carcinogens that are available. The department is developing a program for industrial guidance in the control of toxic chemicals in the workplace and this is really, I guess, the guts to the thing. The program will outline the basic steps which must be implemented to minimize exposure to the hazards. We are reviewing standards and other legislation, both federal and provincial, and reviewing some of the legislation and standards that are in effect throughout United States.

We are attempting to establish a preliminary policy statement which is being prepared for internal review within the entire government. This statement is scheduled for completion in the near future and will deal with classifying suspected and confirmed occupational carcinogens and exposure by the degree of hazard, 987

Monday, 23 February, 1981 registration of carcinogen use by industry and this was a key issue of the Member for Churchill, and certainly I concurred that is one of the prime issues, one of the basics that we have to establish what is in use in industry. Guidelines and regulations to ensure uniform and safe handling of carcinogens, again this was a prime concern to us in the last Legislature, maintaining occupational records, monitoring techniques, research testing, compliance enforcement, employer worker and public participation information to assist industries and workers.

Attention has been given to develop methods to provide industry and workers with accurate information. Industrial hygiene bulletins will be prepared on a number of recognized occupational carcinogens and distribution will begin within the next few months. So we've done not all of what we wanted to do, but we're certainly getting the basics in place, trying to identify the chemicals, trying to identify the industries, and gearing ourselves up to putting bulletins out and preparing ourselves to go out and go through an educational process with industry and with workers in the province. MR.

COWAN: The Minister has brought up the matter of informational bulletins. I wonder if he could provide us with a copy of all those informational bulletins which have gone out through the division since the implementation of that specific policy a couple of years ago; not now, but perhaps for this evening's sitting. MR. MacMASTER: I intended, and still intend to file with the Member for Churchill every type of piece of bulletin we put out in case he hasn't - we were talking about being on the mailing list the other day.

I think that he generally is, at least it's been my instructions that he is, so I don't know if there's any bulletins that we've ever put out. I noticed the Member for Fort Rouge says she is or she isn't . MS. WESTBURY: I would like some . . . MR. MacMASTER: Okay, then that was my instruction too, that MLA's and caucus rooms were to get copies of all the brochures and literature that we put out and again I'm going to put a packet together now because of the insistence, and rightly so - the Member for Fort Rouge, we'll put together two packets of all the literature that we have put out in the last year. MR.

COWAN: Perhaps the Minister can indicate what happened in respect to the informational bulletin which he indicated to us last year was being worked on in respect to chemical hazards in the workplace, and in specific in respect to toxic substance control.

He said - excuse me in 1979 - he said, I think again rightly or wrongly, and I am quoting the Minister, it's going to be our objective this year to establish a procedure of making people aware of the problem - the problem of course being that one of toxic substances - through seminars and as well the others that were working on a bulletin, and that isn't finalized, again I'm quoting, how that's going to work, but we are working on an informational bulletin which I think would also be an ideal way to get this information out. The Minister is now indicating that they are still working on that bulletin.

I would ask him what delay is hampering the production of such a bulletin. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Chairman, the information that's given to me is very basic and reasonably simple, that if you are going to get into this field, and we're into it, then we'd better be damn good and sure of the facts and the proper data that we're using. I don't want to be part of any piece of literature that goes out dealing with this very sensitive issue, very important issue, without making sure that the data base on which we are working and the information that we are working on is absolutely correct.

Now if he is talking about the precise bulletin dealing with this, I say to him that the people that we have involved in this assure me that we are close to having a bulletin, a very basic bulletin, prepared to put out, and that's really all I can say about it. We've put out some annual bulletins on a variety of things, and I'm prepared to table all of them with him. Some of them may in a way deal with it, but I think he's probably talking about something more specific and we haven't precisely put together that specific bulletin yet. MR.

COWAN: I thank the Minister for that information, however, when we discussed this item last year, we said that we didn't think that the efforts on the part of the department were enough to respond to what is a very serious and a rapidly growing problem, and I would suggest that they are still not enough, even with the addition of one person to the program, which the Minister indicates he is prepared to provide over the next year.

The matter of cancer and occupational cancer in specific is one of great concern I know, to the Minister, to the department and to workers in this province, and while we don't have statistics that are more immediate than 1978, I believe those statistics are useful enough to provide to the Minister, and that is that there were, in the Province of Manitoba, over 1, 700 deaths which could be directly attributable to cancer, and that there were over 4,700 new cases of cancer, or approximately 4,700 new cases of cancer in that year.

If we extrapolate that information and look at it in respect to the number of statistical cases which we would expect to be of occupational origin we would find that there would be approximately several hundred deaths and well over a thousand new cases which can be directly attributed to occupational exposure, if we accept the statistics that are being used commonly throughout the industrial world that outline the numbers of cancers which individuals may have as a result of occupational exposure.

It is a very serious problem, and it is a very severe problem for the Province of Manitoba, for all workers who have to work with the vast introduction of new chemicals - chemicals that are coming onstream at an unprecedented rate. The Minister says that he wants to identify those chemicals and identify the workplaces in which they are being used, and I agree with him, that's a very necessary part of the activities of the department, but two people are not going to be able to do it, and the Minister knows that two people are not going to be able to do it even with the full support mechanism of the department. 988

Monday, 23 February, 1981 It's my understanding that the Minister had one person and a summer student working on this program over the summer, and one person since, with or without assistance, I'm not certain, however with those individuals working on this program, they were unable to come forward with an information bulletin - an informational bulletin that just would have provided the basic details and data.

If the Minister is waiting for a firm statement in respect to occupational carcinogens, he's going to wait a long time before that informational bulletin becomes available, because there are very few firm statements that can be made. It's an area where our lack of knowledge does far exceed our knowledge. That's not the Minister's fault; it's not the Government of Manitoba's fault, it's something that is the situation throughout the industrial world, and we're not even keeping up with what's coming onstream. We're not able to effectively determine what's there already.

There has been so many conflicting statements and conflicting figures in respect to carcinogens and carcinogenic properties of chemicals and substances that I'm certain the Minister has taken the course of action which I have been following for the past year or so, and that is not to try to attribute specific figures but to say generally this is a problem. Are there 500,000 new chemicals coming onstream each year, or are there 200,000 new chemicals coming onstream, or are there 250 new chemicals coming onstream next year?

Those are the variances in the statistics which I have run across which just goes to point out the complexity of the problem. It just tells us that we don't have a good handle on the problem at all. Are there being 200 that are being introduced into the workplaces or are there 2,000 that are being introduced to the workplaces? Are 14 of them carcinogenic or are 60-some carcinogenic, or are 2,000 carcinogenic?

Those again, are all figures which come forward in respect to the extent of the problem and the fact is that we just don't know how far this problem extends, but we do know, and the Minister knows that we have a very serious problem and a very severe problem, not only in this province, but as I said, throughout the industrial world. Let us take a look at those figures. There's approximately 24 people in this room; let's say 20 to make it easier. I'm not a mathematician so I like to keep my computations as simple as possible.

If we use the statistics that are generally accepted, four of the people in this room will die of cancer - four of the people in this room will die of cancer. I think that is a statement worth repeating. Five of the people in this room will contact cancer during their lifetime, and if we use the breakdown that is further provided to us in respect to occuapationally induced cancers we know that anywhere from 19 to 40 percent of those persons who contact cancer and who die of cancer will do so because of - at least in some part - occupational exposures.

It is a significant problem for not only the province but for the people in this room and it is one which demands the attention of the government. It is one which I believe the government has not responded to adequately. I am not faulting what they have done.

I am not suggesting that they haven't made an effort, but I am saying categorically that I believe they have not made enough of an effort in respect to identifying the problem; in respect to researching the problem in other jurisdictions so that we can use their information to provide data for our own situation in respect to warning individuals who may face cancer as a result of their occupations and in respect to compensating those individuals who are suspected of having contacted cancer because of occupational sources.

The Manitoba Federation of Labour did a report last year with a summer student that suggested that between 315 and 400 Manitoba workers are dying every year of cancer caused by exposure to substances at their workplace. And that report suggested that we are probably grossly underidentifying the occupational induced cancers.

So the fact is that it is a very serious problem and yet, at the same time we have the Chairperson of the Manitoba Workers Compensation Board saying that he thinks a small number of cancer cases identified by the board every year is an accurate reflection of the workplace dangers and does not understate the case. Well, in fact, the small number we're talking about, I think would probably be less than ten; maybe less than five. I'm not certain; we will have to look at the annual report when it becomes available.

So we have that discrepancy in the perception of the problem, and I'm not saying that one or the other is correct. What I am saying is, it is an area where we are totally ignorant of what is happening and what is going to happen, and I would suggest to the Minister that the problem is going to get worse, not better. And I think that if one follows the incidence of cancer in this province, one will find that in fact we are coming across more cancers, that more people are dying of cancer each year, and that the problem is indeed worsening rather than becoming better.

So what we have to do is recognize that we have an area where we have very little knowledge, where we have very little information available to us, but where a great deal of work is demanded and while we commend the efforts of the Minister in beginning to deal with the problem, we certainly condemn him for not having gone further in response to what he knows is a major catastrophe for the workers of this province.

As far back as October 1977, and that was after the election, three days after the election, the Advisory Council on Workplace Safety and Health in this province agreed that there was a need to co ordinate federal and provincial action in the areas of toxic substance control and at that time they said that they would convey that message to both the new Minister and the new Deputy Minister at the earliest possible convenience. That was the direction given the Chairperson of that committee by the committee itself.

So we ·know that they had priorized it at that time and that they had brought forward strong recommendations for action, and we see them again in November of 1977 talking about that same issue when they're going through the Act, and they said at present there is very little done in the legal control of toxic substances in the Province of Manitoba, and they were.right at that time. And they are right if they made the same statement now, that there is very little done in the way of legal control of toxic substances in Manitoba. That is not to take away from the efforts of the 989

Monday, 23 February, 1981 employees of the division in respect to trying to deal with that problem. I know I have relied upon them from time to time to assist workers who have forwarded complaints through me to them, in response to samples, in response to information, and they have always been more than enthusiastic and more than helpful in their approach. However, that does not provide them with legal ways of controlling the problem. That just means that they are good employees and that they are doing their job as best they can.

But I would suggest, and they have never said this to me, but I would suggest that they are being hampered by the lack of legal control over the introduction of toxic substances, and it is an area that is very very complex.

The Advisory Council said that there was going to have to be consultations between the Federal and Provincial Governments; Saskatchewan went a couple of years ago on a program to attempt to co-ordinate their approach to identifying and controlling toxic substances, and I have a press release that just came out from their government a couple of days ago which suggested they have literally said it's an area where the Federal Government is going to have to take the initiative and that they are going to have to push the Federal Government to take that initiative.

But the Federal Government, we know, and I think the Minister and I will both agree upon this statement, will not take that initiative unless there is strong pressure from the provinces and strong pressure from the workers themselves to force them to take that position. They have done so very little in respect to comprehensive control of toxic substances that they, too, must be severely faulted for their lack of action. The fact is that no government is dealing with this in as comprehensive a way as is demanded by the problem.

The Advisory Council, by the way, speaking to the matter of informational bulletins for chemicals, suggested on June 1, 1979, that there be an informational bulletin for chemicals, so that suggestion is not new but we still don't have the bulletin. We still don't even have a rudimentary bulletin to send out to people in respect to the hazards they may face in their workplace from toxic chemicals.

So we have to review this project as well as the noise control project, another area of great concern in some great detail during the Estimates; I'm certain we'll have an opportunity to proceed further with them at the sitting of the committee this evening. I just want to leave the Minister with the message that we are not satisfied and think that much more has to be done if we are to effectively deal with this problem. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hour of 4:30 having arrived, I move that committee rise for Private Members' Hour. Committee rise. SUPPLY- HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION MR.

CHAIRMAN, Abe Kovnats (Radisson): This committee will come to order. I would direct the honourable members' attention to page 82 of the Main Estimates. Department of Highways and Transportation. Resolution No. 87, Item (

d) Highway Traffic Board, Motor Transport Board, Taxicab Board and Licence Suspension Appeal Board, Item

(1) Salaries - pass - the Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman, I introduced some very general remarks on this item in which I did not mention a particular company; in which I did not mention a particular case; in which I spoke about the benefits, or lack of benefits, of regulation and the manner in which the Motor Transport Board deals with an application when it is made. My honourable friend got up and said in answer to that, Mr. Chairman, that I lost a case in court and that I am bringing the grievance into the Legislature. You will note, Mr.

Chairman, that I didn't mention the court case when I brought the matter up, and there are still proceedings before the court, Mr. Chairman. The court case might not be lost but that is really beside the point. What I am concerned with, Mr. Chairman, is whether the Minister wishes to know what happens when we get out of this Chamber and how citizens are dealt with and whether or not the rules, which he made applicable, which he indicated are the way in which manners should proceed, are in fact taking place before the Motor Transport Board. And if the Minister is not wishing to be aware of that, Mr.

Chairman, then I tell him, frankly, I don't think that I should be wasting my time discussing this matter in his estimates. Mr. Chairman, the Minister is not listening; the Minister apparently does not care what happens in this area. MR. CHAIRMAN: (1) - pass

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-5-24a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 5th hansardpdf 24a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	dda8cdbf81f24ce9350c1cdaea216b7ee309b11b

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