Manitoba Hansard — 17 June 1987 (Sitting 71, 33rd Legislature, 2nd Session)

33-2-71

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Wednesday, 17 June, 1987. Time - 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER , Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Pres enting Reports by Standing and Special Committees ... MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: Pursuant to

section 7 of the Legislative Assembly Management Commission, I'd like to table the Annual Report for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1986. Notices of Motion . . . Introduction of Bills . INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have 30 students from Gr ade 9 from the Lockport School under the direction of Sheila White. The school is located in the constituency of the Honour able First Minister. On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this after noon.

ORAL QUESTIONS MTS - availability of overview of internal audit to Member for Pembina MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Pembina. � MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

Madam Speaker, in Public Accounts, the Minister of Finance indicated that he would review an overview by the Provincial Auditor, which was provided to himself, and presumably the former Minister of MTS, regarding their concerns or their ideas on an internal audit that was done by the Te lephone System on the MT X involvement in Saudi Arabia; can the Minister indicate, since we're having the Public Utilities Com mittee convening tomorrow to discuss MTS-MTX, whether that overview will be made available to myself today? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Mini ster of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I can confirm that I did take that question as notice last week when we met in Public Accounts. It is not normal for those Internal Audit Reports of the Provincial Auditor to be made public. The Provincial Auditor, under his act, has the provisions to publicly - through his Annual Report - refer any items that have not been dealt with, by virtue of his internal audit, to either corporations or departments, and he also has the right that if he fee ls that something is extraordin ary, in terms of concern, to report it directly to the Legislature.

However , given the amount of detailed review of the matters of MTX, I understand that the Min ister responsible for MTS is prepared, without prejudice, to provide that audit to the mem bers. MR. D. ORCHARD: Madam Speaker, not being a lawyer, what does prepared to give us that internal audit overview "without prejudice" mean? HON. E. KOSTYRA: As I indicated, by my background to the answer, that the normal practice for those internal audits is for them to be dealt with by the corporations or the departments responsible. So, in terms of that practice, it's without prejudice to that practice. MR. D.

ORCHARD: Then just so we understand comple tely , my question is to the Minister responsible for the Te lephone System, will the Minister have that either available to me this afternoon or tomorrow at committee? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Minister responsible for MTS. HON. G. DOER: Ye s, Madam Speaker. Business development - Min. to listen to concerns of business community MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. E. CONNERY: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speak er, to the Acting Minister of Business Dev elopment, we on this side of the House have been condemning the government for their policies as to how they affect business. The President of the Chamber of Commerce, Dorothy Debbie, has said the business community in Manitoba is very frustrated with this government because they're not listening to what they're say ing. Madam Speake r, they're even prepared to go so far as to picket the Legislature to try to get the attention of this government.

Will the Minister encoura ge the Minister of Business Deve lopment to sit down with the business community and listen to their concerns and their frustrations? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Min ister of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Madam Sp eak er, I kno w tha t sometimes when we consult, and I was Minister of Business Development and Tourism, and I do know 3168

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 that the c onsultation that goes on between all governm ent departments, but particularly Business Development and Tourism, and Industry Trade and Technology, that in fact there is listening going on. And the budgets of this province have reflected that fact consistently over the years. We have been sensitive to the fact, Madam Speaker, that in some areas this province has tax regimes which are at or near national levels, and that is a problem for concern.

But, Madam Speaker, there is another side to consultation, and I heard yesterday the President of the Chamber of Commerce talking about The Natural Gas Corporation Act and disclaiming the fact that this was not good for Manitoba; and I remind members opposite and I remind the President of the Chamber of Commerce that Manitoba enjoys the lowest hydro rates, the lowest telephone rates , and the lowest automobile insurance rates in this province because of public corporations. Madam Speaker, that is good for business. Bill No. 61 - will Minister withdraw MR. E.

CONNERY: While the Minister says that they are listening, obviously they're not acting, because the business community is not happy. Will the Minister have some influence on his caucus, as far as Bill No. 61, Final Offer Selection goes, because the business community is opposed to it; the labour community is opposed to it; everybody seems to be opposed to it except this government and Bernie Christophe, who they're trying to bail out. Will the Minister use his influence to try to have this bill removed? HON. J.

STORIE: Madam Speaker, certainly this government is prepared to listen, and I have expressions of concern by the Chamber of Commerce and by certain, not all, representatives of labour; and we are fortunate enough in this province to have a committee structure in between Second and Third Reading so that the public can come and make representation to government, so that we can not only listen to their concerns, but get the specifics, because while I've heard some general expressions of concerns I am not sure we've had an opportunity to discuss the specifics.

The committee is the place where that happens and I know that the Chamber of Commerce will be bringing forward their specific concerns, and perhaps some recognition of the positive aspects of the bill at committee stage . Events Magazine - when to be made public MR. E. CONNERY: A final question to the same Minister, Madam Speaker, which will show the incompetence of this government and the Minister of Business Development and Tourism . They have what they call their "Events Magazine" which lists all the events in Manitoba. The Summer Events Magazine comes out and lists the events from the 1st of May on.

Can the Minister tell us when they're finally going to make it public so that the people of Manitoba will know what's going on in this province because we do have a lot of good even ts, but people cannot plan ahead because the magazin e isn't out. Is this the competency of this government? HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker , I unfortunately could not read the title from the piece of paper that the member was waving so frantically around, but I would certainly be willing to take as notice the question of whether publ ications are presented in the most timely fashion .

I do know that the department has already produced a whole series of publications , and the members shouldn't try and leave on the record the suggestion that that is the sum and total of the advertising program of the Department of Business Development and Tourism . In fact, there are dozens of publications, most of which are already in the hands of those people who are doing their planning. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage la Prairie with a final Supplementary . MR. E. CONNERY: Madam Speaker, for the Minister / - it's the summer coming events ...

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the honourable member have a question? MR. E. CONNERY: Well, he wanted to know, he wasn't sure what the listing was and I wanted to make sure that when he took it as notice, Madam Speaker , because they have such a hard time in being competent , I didn 't want to leave the slightest opportunity for them to make a mistake . Thank you . Investment Saving Certificate Program - how far along toward target MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris.- (Interjection)- Order please . The Honourable Member for Morris has the floor . The Honourable Member for Portage did not have a question. MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, I direct my.._ question to the Minister of Finance. A little over a week ago the Minister of Finance announced the provincial bond issue called the Investment Savings Certificate and Madam Speaker, at that time, when the Minister didn't have the courtesy to make that announcement in the House, we were led to believe that the Minister indicated that he hoped that $20 million would be raised in the issue of those bonds. Can the Minister report to the House today as to how well along that target is being reached as far as the raising of $20 million? HON. E.

KOSTYRA: Madam Speaker, first of all, to correct the member, the announcement was made in the House on Budget night. It very clearly was made that we were going to proceed along that line , so that assertion is incorrect. It also appears , Madam Speaker, that I may be somewhat , dare I say, conservative in my estimate on how well these bonds will be, because I've had indications from the investment community and the financial community in Manitoba that it should do much 3169

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 better than my estimates, but at this point, since they are not formally on sale, I have nothing to report. MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker, that begs a question. The Minister says they're not formally on sale. I know of many investment dealers who are indeed offering them for sale. What does the Minister mean when he says they are not formally on sale? HON. E. KOSTY AA: We ll, the dealers and that obviously are letting their clients know about the sale, but it will officially be av ailable at the be ginning of next week.

Investment Savings Certificate Program - why such a conservative estimate MR. C. MANNESS: Can the Minister tell us, in the final supplementary to the Minister, Madam Speaker. Can the Minister indicate why he has placed such a conservative estimate of $20 million on what he hopes may be raised, given that the Province of Alberta raised over $900 million in a very short period of time, using more or less the same instrument? HON. E. KOST YAA: I guess because I'm a cautious Finance Minister, Madam Speaker.

Psychiatric treatment for eating disorders - government action to alleviate waiting list MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for River Height s. MAS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health.

Madam Speaker, the Health Sciences Centre is the only hospital in the Province of Manitoba which is presently providing treatment to patients suffering from severe eating disorders, such as, anorexia nervosaok or bulimia, that they suffer from two particular difficulties at the present time; one is that their staff psychiatrist who only gives half-time to the area will be indeed leaving at the end of July, and they only have six beds to treat such patients.

Can the Minister tell us what this government is doing to alleviate a waiting list of between 80 and 100 patients who are sear ching for this particular treatment help? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Min ister of Health. HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, I want to make it quite clear that I don't consider that these discussions - fine there is information being given, but these discussions and assuring of policy - should be done during this period. These discussions are going on continually, every day with the different hospitals.

We work with the board and we don't intend to just react to whatever is in the news media and so on. I think that would be very unfair . So, this discussion is going on, there are people that want us to increase the coverage that we have on hospitalization and medicare. We're looking at priorities and if there is any change, and we're discussing this with the hospitals, we'll make the announc ement. But I think the last thing we want to do is react to people that are not going through the proper channels, that are going directly to the news media. This would be blackmail and I don't want to start that.

Psychiatric treatment for eating disorders - patients not hampered by closure of beds MAS. S. CARSTAIRS: A supplementary question to the same Minister. Madam Speak er, can the Minister assure the House that patients who are presently looking for treatment will not be hampered in that treatment by the closure of six beds as of July? HON. L. DESJARDINS: Madam Speaker, if there is any change at all, I will be discussing it with the commission and make a statement at that time. CGE industrial benefits package - when can we expect expenditure MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Sturgeon Creek. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Industry. On Ma rch 26, 19 85, the Premier tabled an announc ement regard ing the industrial benefits package for CGE Memo of Underst anding. These industrial benefits would come to Manitoba because CGE received the generator contr act without tender. The first indication, "investment at a minimum of $10 million in long-term viable operations in Manitoba by the end of 19 91. " Madam Speaker, it's been two years since the annoucement. When can we expect some announc ements as to the expenditure of these funds in Manit oba by CGE?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Min ister of Industry Trade and Te ch nology. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker, cer tainly before the time called for in the agreement. As the member indicates there is an agreement bet ween us and CGE. That agreement, we expect, will be honoured by CGE and by the Province of Manitoba. There are negotiations ongoing with respect to some specific items that CGE might be interested in investi ng in and, as the member knows, CGE has already publicly announced some investments in the province. MR. F.

JOHNSTON: Madam Speaker , they have announced part of their economic program for northern Native people is the only annou ncement that I have seen. One other part of it is creation of a minimum of 100 new full-time jobs in one of Manitoba's high technology industries betwe en'85 and 19 91. What are the discussions regarding this part of the agreement? 3170

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 MR. D. ORCHARD: They're non-existent. MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Mini ster of Industry Trade and Te chnol ogy. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm very pleased that the member is raising these issues because it indicates, once again, the benefits that we have negotiated for Manitoba with respect to Limestone. The agreement itself, as the member indicates, calls for these things happening between the start-up of Limestone in 19 91; as the member knows there's still some four years left to go until we arrive at that time.

During this period CGE will be required to have those jobs in place which will mean, for Manitoba, Madam Speaker, not only that we got a good deal on the price involved for Limestone. And as the member knows when he was in government there were negotiations when they were talking in terms of starting up hydro-electric developments in terms of a direct non-tendered contract with CGE.

Those kinds of discussions had gone on with the Schreyer Government and, indeed, they went on with this particular gov ernment, but only under this go vernment were there discussions and, indeed, an actual agreement with respect to offsets, and we're very pleased with that. HVDC Research Centre and Manitoba Micro-Electronic Centre - how far along are these projects MR. F. JOHNSTON: Madam Speak er, if there was something concrete going on you may rest assured the Minister would have told us, but obviously there isn't something concrete going on.

I wonder , for the third, about this other part of the agreement, "funding of two research products at a level of $10 0,000 each; one of which will be conducted by the Manitoba High Voltage Direct Current HVDC Research Centre at the University of Manitoba, and the other by the Man itoba Micro Electronic Centre." There is no date in the agreement regarding those projects, can the Minister tell us how far ahead those are at the present time? HON. V.

SCHROEDER: Madam Speaker, as I indicated to the member previously there have been discussions going on, there's the Micro-Electronic Centre at the University of Manitoba which the member may not be aware of has been funded. The Hydro people have been providing assistance and these things are happening. What the member should recognize is the fact that over this period of time we have had strong economic growth in Manitoba.

We have had good statistics in terms of employment growth, in terms of housing growth, in terms of job growth, in terms of one of the stronge st growths in terms of business formation in this coun try, so we're very pleased with the progress we're making to now. CGE contract - Min. to negotiate MR. F. JOHNSTON: We ll, Madam Speaker , the Minister obviously isn't giving us any answers.

My question to him this time would be, with manufacturing investment down in this provinc e, and private investment down in this provinc e, can he do something to negotiate this contract with CGE so that jobs will be created in the Province of Manitoba as soon as possible? HON. V. SC HROEDER: Madam Speak er, as the member knows, during our term in office, the population of this province has grown by some 50,000. While they were in office, in fact, there were fewer people left in Manitoba the day they left office than the day they entered office.

And in three of the last five years, Madam Speak er, in thr ee of the la st five years, priv ate investments in Manitoba has grown at a rate of from two to three times the national . . . MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. The Honourable Member Emerson. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Emerson dike - request extension in northwest corner MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for Emerson has the floor. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources.

The Town of Emerson has not had the privilege of being properly diked for flood protection over the many years. While the negotiations have taken place, especially on the American side, it is my understanding that an agreement has been reached there. The Mayor and Council have requested the Provincial and Federal Government to extend the dike in the northwest corner of the town to include 40 acres for future development.

Can the Minister indicate whether he would support the request for the extension of the dike in the northwest .. corner of the town? � MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Mi nister of Natural Resources. HON. L. HARAPIAK: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This matter has been brought to our attention, in fact, the Member of Parliament for the area approached us on the same matter, and we indicated that, of course, our concern had to be with the funding arrangements for that particular extension.

The Federal Government, as a participant, has indicated that they are not prepared to fund the extension and it would be impossible for us to proceed without that input. I've indica ted that I am prepared to meet with the Town of Emerson, but I think that meet ing should take place with some federal representatives present, because clearly it involves the three levels of government. So at this stage, no, there is no provision for the extra funding to extend the diking. 3171

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 Emerson dike - when project to proceed MR. A. DRIEDGER: Madam Speaker , to the same Minister. The Minister has indicated in his correspondence to me that $280,000 will be spent for diking on the international side of the Town of Emerson. Can the Minister indic ate when this project will be proceeded with? HON. L. HARAPIAK: I would have to check specifically what the timing of it would be for this year, but my understanding was that there was to have been some work on a portion of that this year. But I will check specifically and report back to the member and the House.

Provincial campground and lot rates as gazetted - are they the same as of Jan. '86 l MR. A. DRIEDGER: Madam Speaker , to the same ' Minister. I have a new question. In the Manitoba Gazette of June 13, 1987, a whole series of incr eases in rates for the campgrounds and lots, etc., were gazetted, and we just received that. Can the Minister indicate whether these are new inc reases, again, or whether these are increases that were in effect since the beginning of the year? Can the Minister maybe indicate, as well, whether fees can be increased before they have been gazetted? HON. L.

HARAPIAK: I want to point out to the member that these are the same

schedule of fees that were shared with the members opposite during the course of my Estimates. The timing of these is, and I'm sure the members opposite will recal l, that there have been occasions on which fees for specific activities, whether they be for hunting purposes, there have been occasions on which the fees have, in fact , been collected prior to the fees being gazetted. But if that was a problem, in thi s particular instance, it's not unique to this government, it has been a problem for the Opposition � when they were in government, as well.

Provincial campground and lot rates - legality of if not gazetted MR. A. DRI EDGER : Ma dam Speaker , a final supplementary to the same Minister. Can the Minister indic ate whether those inc reases are legal, if they have not been gazetted properly? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Ye s, Madam Speaker we feel that we are ... SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Madam Speaker, could I reph rase my question if there's a problem? MADAM SPEAKER: I'd appreciate it, so that it isn't seeking either an interpr etation of a statute or an opinion. MR.

A, DRIEDGER: Madam Speaker, to the same Minister , by what authority can his department increase fees before they have them properly documented and gazetted? HON. L. HARAPIAK: Madam Speaker , I would just respond in saying that the precedent of previous governments provides us with a basis for proceed ing as we have this year. Universities costs increased - terms of compensation package MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Gar ry. MR. C. BIRT: Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is to the Minister of Education.

The Minister of Finance, in his Budget, raised a number of charges to the universities, namely, an incr ease in electrical charges, payroll costs, and other items, and it affe cted the budgets of the universities, in particul ar, the University of Manitoba, by some $2 million, removing it from their current budget. The Minister of Education, during Estimates, indicated that he would be announcing in the future, a program to possibly compensate the universities for this. Has the Minister now made that decision to compensate and, if so, what are the terms of that compensation package?

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Education. HON. J. STORIE: Ye s, Madam Speaker , I regret, actually , the delay in making the announcement. There is a submission coming forward and I hope to be able to make an announcement within the next two weeks, of the results of the review . MR. C. BIRT: A suppleme ntary question to the Minister on the same matter. Will the Minister be making that announcement in the House? HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker, a decision has not been made on how that announc ement will take place.

Obvious ly, the un iversi tie s have already been in discussion with the Universities Grants Commission and are aware, more or less, of the directions that are being considered. If the member would like an announcement in the House, I can certainly undertake to make that kind of announcement here. Universities - details of funding MR. C.

BIRT: Madam Speaker , a question that was raised during the Budget that some $20 million would be made avai lable for the universities, and the Minister made reference to it during Estimates, I would ask the Minister when he'll be announcing the details and specifics of this $20 million program, which I believe some of the funding has already been provided to the universities, but when will he be making the full details of this package available? HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker, that will be in due course. 3172

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 Inter-City Gas - R.M.'s made aware of takeover by province MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. H. PANKRATZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker . My question is to the Minister of Energy and Mines. Can the Minister indicate to the House whether he has written all the R.M.' s in the Province of Manitoba, trying to get support for the ICG takeover? MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Minis ter of Energy and Mines. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker , I had received correspondence from the city, from some municip alities expressing concern about high prices for natural gas.

I had sent them a letter on this matter over a month ago, and I did send the municipalities of Manitoba and the City of Winnipeg information pertaining to the policy announc ed by the Premier of Manitoba with respect to Manitoba's move to lower natural gas prices by some $50 million and save people of Manitoba $50 million, residential families $15 0 a year, Madam Speaker , and small businesses, $16 00 per year. We think that's very good news for the people of Manitoba and we would want the municipalities of Manitoba who had expressed concerns about this to know about it.

Inter-City Gas - long-term plan for servicing rural communities MR. H. PANKRATZ: What is the long-range plan as to servicing these rural communities? Could the Minister indicate in this House what his long-range plan would be towards that? MADAM SPEAKER: The Hono urable Min ister of Energy and Mines. HON. W.

PARASIUK: Ye s, Madam Speaker , I'm pleased to deal with this matter because we have not had much in the way of servic ing of communities in rural Manitoba over the last 25 years, if one compares the natural gas distribution system in Manitoba as opposed to the natural gas distribution system in Saskatchewan which has been owned by the people of Saskatchewan and provides natural gas distribution to a far greater number of rural communities than is the case in Manitoba.

We have indicated, and the Premier's indicated this in the policy announcement, that it is the intent of the government to assess the situation and determine where it's feasible to extend natural gas distribution to more Manitoba communities. We believe that Manitobans want that, Madam Speaker , and we certainly will be proceeding with the policy of determ ining where that's feasi ble. Inter-City Gas - 5-year plan re financial situation MR. H. PANKRATZ: My final question to the Minister. The Minister indicates that there will be a $50 million saving.

So obviously there must be a study or some kind of a financial plan in place. Would the Minister be willing to table in this House a five-year plan as to the financial situation of Inter-City Gas? HON. W.

PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, when this matter comes before the House, The Loan Act material will be provided, but I'm surprised that the Member for La Verendrye has not gone through the numbers and determined that if in fact Manitoba residential families, pensioners, other people, small busine sses, and commercial enterprises are paying $3 commodi ty, $3 per thousand cubic feet, as the commodity cost and the government is proceeding with measures that reduce the commodity cost of gas to $1.8 0 to $2.00, that presents savings of $50 million and I'm surprised that members on the other side - not all members on the other side - but members on the other side aren't fighting to make sure that that takes place and aren't acting unan imously to ensure that the people of Manitoba get that $50 million savings which they deserve.

Inter-City Gas - tabling of study MR. H. PANKRATZ: My final, final question to the same Minister. Obviously he must have a study in place and I would please recommend to him to table that in the House. MADAM SPEAKER: That's not a question. The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you. I have a question for the Attorney-General, Madam Speaker . I believe the Attorney-General meets regularly with the head of the RCMP and the Chief of the City of Winnipeg Police Force. I wonder if he could assure us that organized crime is not involved in any activity in Manitoba. I don't believe he heard it .

MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. If honourable members want to have a priv ate discussion while other members participate in question period, they can do so elsewhere. � Organized crime - not involved in activities in province MADAM SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for St. Norbert has the floor. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Speaker . I wanted to ask the Attorney-General if, as a result of his regular meetings with the head of the RCMP and the City of Winnipeg Police Department, he can assure us and residents of this province that organized crime is not involved in any activities within the province. HON. R.

PENNER: I have no indication that organ ized crime in the sense which I presume the Member for St. Norbert is using it, is involved in Manitoba. Any crime involving the participation of more than one person has an element of organi zation about it. We have had car theft rings investigated successfully by 3173

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 the RCMP, and in that respect I should point out and commend the RCMP for having established a province wide auto theft unit; so there's elements of organized crime in that sense. It would appear, although my department is not directly involved in the prosecu tion, that many of the drug cases which have been prosecuted in the courts have elements of organization about them.

But there's been no evidence, to my knowledge, that even here where one might expect some connections, there's been no suggestion that there have been infiltration into Mani toba of some of the so-called prime families from the United States. So there's no evidence of that kind that I have. Motor vehicle deaths - increase 1986 over 1985 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker , I direct my question to the Minister of Transportation.

Whereas motor vehicle death occupancies are dropping nationally, Madam Speaker , it appears that this trend is not being duplicated in the Province of Manitoba. I would ask the Minister of Transportation if he could repeat for the record the measure by which deaths, motor vehicle occupancy deaths, have increased '86 over'85, and also the same measure for injuries, Madam Speaker . MADAM SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Mini ster of Hig hways and Transporta tion. HON. J. PLOHMAN: Ma dam Speak er, we have discussed this during the Estimates process and the member has the figures.

What is clear is that there has been an inc rease in accidents and deaths in many provinces across Canada and so his statement that they have declined in other areas of the country is not correct. In addition to that, the point that I made very clearly during Estimates to the member was that the incr ease in the number of deaths and injuries was largely to people who were not wearing seat belts at the time that the accident occurred. In most cases, this was the fac t; and it is clear that seat belts have decreased the number of injuries insofar as those that are wearing those seat belts.

What we have to do of course is continue our efforts to educate the public and ensure that the public is aware of the benefits that occur to them by wearing seat belts because it does protect them from serious injuri es and deaths, and that's very clear in the information we have. Seat belt deaths - reason for increase MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker , given that the Minister in committee indicated that road deaths had increased by some 30 in number , '86 over'85; and given that injuries had increased roughly by 800; and, Madam Speaker , bearing in mind that seat belt usage had jumped from 10 percent or 11 percent to 60 percent, could the Minister again tell us why this phenomenon has occurred, given that when the debate was raging over seat belts, the government indicated that deaths would decrease by 30 percent and that injuries would fall 50 percent? A MEMBER: It's not happened; they've gone up. HON. J.

PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker, I indicated clearl y to the mem ber that approximately 70 percent of those injuries and deaths occurred to people who were not wearing seat belts at the time that they occurred. That is the signific ant factor. The truth of the matter is, Madam Speaker, that there has been an incr ease in the number of miles driven , more people on the roads, and of course therefore more exposure.

And, as well, with the economy as it has been, in an upturn in Manitoba and more people being able to enjoy and get out and travel because there was more disposable income, Madam Speaker, there has been more people driving with an upturn in the economy. But the fact is that there's still a great distance to go and we have to continue efforts to improve these statistics in the future and we will be making every effort to do that.

I should also mention to the mem ber, Ma dam Speaker, that a snapshot, a statistical snapshot is not necessarily going to provide an accurate comparison and the mem ber, during Estimates, agreed with my assessment of that. He also stated that that is true. These can vary from year to year because it is just a snapshot in comparing from one year to the next. There has to be a long term trend that has to be considered along with other variables before making definitive statements on these figures. MR. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, given the long term trend over three years, since the advent of the seat belt law, there have been increases in deaths since the base when there were virtually no seat belt useage in this province. Can, again, the Minister try to rationalize why deaths are increasing? And furthermore, can the Minister indicate whether an internal study has been done, looking into the causes of the increases in seat belt related deaths and second ly, in the area of injuries? MADAM SPEAKER: The first part of the que stion is repetitive. The second part of the question is in order.

The Honourable Mini ster of Hig hways and Transportat ion. HON. J. PLOHMAN: I think, Madam Speaker , what the member has not given to the House, the member has not indicated there has been a decline since the high year that he referred to in injuries and deaths and that point should be made as well. There are variables. It's up and down, varies from year to year. There will be some more information coming in this debate. Obviously when the member's resolution comes up, he has taken a stand that he is agains t seat belts, Madam Speaker .

I think that means that very clearly he is against the savings to the medicare system and he is also against protecting people . . . 3174

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. As the Honourable Minister well knows, he's not to impute motives. MR. C. MANNESS: Madam Speak er, I feel badly that the Minister had to engage in a personal attack. Again, I ask my final question. Has there been an internal report done as to what has happened over the last two years with respect to deaths and injuries since the incorporation, since the development of the seat belt law? HON. J. PLOHMAN: Madam Speaker , I did indic ate to the member that Dr. Mulligan was doing a study at the University of Manitoba.

We have preliminary draft reports that have been completed. However, the final form is not completed and then released, it has to be released both federally and provincially because it is an initia tive that is un de rtaken un der the subagreements, and hopefully as soon as Mr. Crosbie is ready to release the information, we will be prepared to do that.

I think the report does illuminate a great deal the factors involved insofar as the effec tiveness of seat belts, and it in no way indicates, Madam Speak er, in prelimi nary information I have seen, that seat belts have not been effective as the member is certainly asserting in this House. MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: May I inform honourable members that we had 35 students from Grade 2 from the Regent Park School under the direction of Mrs. Mislow and Mrs. Kroeker.

The school is in the constituency of the Ho nourable Minister of the Environment and I'm sorry that they had to leave before we could welcome them to the Legislature this afte rnoon. CONFLICT OF INTEREST MADAM SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Min ister of Culture Heritage and Recrea tion. HON. J. WASYL YCIA -LE IS: Thank you, Madam Speaker , I'd like to declare a conflict of interest.

I was away last week when Bill 68 was introduced and I would like to inform the House that my husband, Ron Wasylycia-Leis is the Data Centre Manager for Inter-City Gas, and as a result I will absenting myself from all discussion, debate and votes on Bill 68. However, I understand that I will not be required to leave question period when the matter is raised. ORDERS OF THE DAY HOUSE BUSINESS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J. COWAN: Ye s, Ma dam Speak er.

It's my understanding that there will be Private Memb ers' Hour today and, previous to that, would you please call the Debate on Second Readings as they appear in the Order Paper on pages 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, starting with Bill No. 14 and working your way through to Bill 69, inclus ive. MADAM SPEAKER: Debate on Second Read ing, on the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, Bill No. 14, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Stand, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: Agreed.

On the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney General, Bill No. 25, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Stand. MADAM SPEAKER: Agreed. ADJOURNED DEBATE ON SECOND READING BILL NO. 26 - THE ENVIRONMENT ACT MADAM SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of the Environment, Bill No. 26, standing in the name of the Honourable Member for Niakwa. MR. A. KOVNATS: Madam Speaker, have I been recognized? I'm not sure. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Nia kwa, yes. MR. A. KOVNATS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I would like to make a few comments on this environment bill. The Environmen t Act, the new environment legislation, Bill No. 26 in the province, can be a positive step forward with the implication for all � Manitobans. � Manitoba has the opportunity to assume a leading role in the environmental protection of Canada. The changing times requires an ongoing review of the act and changes and additions as new products and new problems arise. Madam Speaker , I would just like to state and read what environment me ans as stated in the act. Environment means (

a) air, land and water; or (

b) plant and animal life, including humans. I would like to speak a little bit about the water aspect, Madam Speaker . This act falls short of correcting the changing values and the changing problems that are reflective of a chang ing socie ty, par ticularly the environmental protection of the quality of water which we receive from Shoal Lake. More than two-thirds of the population of Man itoba, all in the City of Winnipeg, consume clean, clear water from Indian Bay, and this act should address the problem, first and foremost and, Madam Speaker , now. A colleague will be going into more detail concerning the environmental protection of our drinking water, but 3175

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 I would just like to read at this point what it says about water in the act: " 'water' includes flowing or standing water on or below the surface of the earth and ice formed thereon ." We're talking about an area that I'm assuming that there's been some indication, when we talk about the ice, and I think there might be some reference to the area at Churchill, the Port of Churchill, which I know that we all have a special fe eling, but there's nothing to give us any indication of any environmental protect ion because I would think that there would be some dredging of channels into the Port of Churchill, which would be changing the environment in that particular area, so that we can have a greater industry in the shipping of grain out of Churchill.

I don't know whether this has been taken into consideration, but there are no plans if it will come into being, and I think that there should be something that we could have in the future of the protection of the area in Churchill, particularly in the dredging of channels up there, which in fact could mean greater � activity up in that area and a greater future for the ' area up in Churchill. I know that I would be getting some support when it comes to some of the members of the House, particularly the Member for Churchill. We've discussed this on many occasions.

There's nothing in the act, so we can proceed and give the area of Churchill the protection that it does require. Madam Speaker, the Minister must listen to the advice of the people of the Province of Manitoba, not just those close at hand. He's got to have hearings and there is something in the bill which says that hearings will be held. But who better can tell the Minister of the protection that is required for our environment? The time for monitoring and checking the feasi bility and looking into all of these things that delay the Minister taking action have to be set aside.

The Minister must get up and take action now. This bill is a start, Madam Speaker, and I hope the Min ister is listening because I do agree that this bill is a start, but it doesn't go far enough yet. The intent of the act is to develop and maintain an environmental management system in Manitoba to ensure that the • environment is maintained in the same high quality for ' all Manitobans today and for future generations. Let Manitoba be a leader to all of Canada and to all our neighbours.

I made mention of public consultation and I would just make a few remarks about that, Madam Speaker , where this is a good aspect of the bill, if in fact it is followed. But it's at the discretion of the Minister to have public consultations. It should be laid down more specifically , because this is where the advice from the professionals, the people who know, will come to the Minister, without him having to pay anything. It's not from staff; it's just from everybody who wants to contribute to the development and the environmental protection.

I was surprised, somewhat, Madam Speaker , when I was at an environmental meeting where the public were making presentations and I listened to some of the briefs and some of the recommendations. I guess the thing that surprised me was that even though this act calls for public consultation, the first people to speak at the mee tings that I was at were people who represented the province. 3176 It seemed that they were staff of the Minister's Department of Environment and they were making rec ommendations to the Clean Environ ment Commission.

It struck me as being odd, where the government was making rec ommen dations at these public hearings to the Clean Environment Commission, who in turn would be making recom mendations back to the govern ment. What were they trying to prove? If recommendations were to be made, let them be made, but why take up the time of these public hearings? Madam Speaker, I am concerned about the far reaching and extraordinary powers that the director and the environmental officers will have. Sometimes these powers lead to insensitivity and lack of common sense.

I guess some people, and I guess I've got to include myself, sometimes become a little bit too officious. This environment act doesn't protect against the director and the environmental officers if they do become too officious. There's got to be some common sense that comes in with all of these bills. I hope the Minister will be monitoring the actions of his director and his environmental officers. I think he will be, but I'm just giving him some suggestions on my part so that this environmental act will come about and be of some consequence.

I am concerned that the Minister, through this act , will be reducing the responsibi lities of the City of Winnipeg. You know, you don't turn your back on experience, experience in pollution control, Madam Speaker. The technology of design and the operation of large pollution control systems - the expertise is with the City of Winnip eg. Here we are reducing that expertise so that the province will have complete control of all environmental matters in this regard. I hope that the province will take advantage of the expertise of the City of Winn ipeg and use this expertise and experience.

I hope the Minister will be prepared to accept this expertise. Madam Speaker, the new law includes a licensing process and substantial fines to offenders. I hope that these substantial fines will be enough to make sure that people who del iberately break the law when it comes to the environment will be fearful enough of the large fines that they will withhold dumping materials and deli berately breaking the law. I think that in this regard the Minister is coming along on the right foot.

I think that as times change the fines will have to change and the Minister must be kept right abreast of the value of a dollar so that if the fines have to be adjusted the Minister will adjust these fines as we go along. (Mr. Deputy Speaker , C. Santos, in the Chair.) The licensing under the Class 1, 2 and 3 developments comes under the director's jur isdiction, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and doesn't allow or make the provision of citizen groups to initiate court action in environmental manners. There is legislation before the Assembly of Ontario now debating this aspect of citizen participation.

We don't have any of that in our particular bill, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I hope the Minister might consider bringing in an amendment at committee and at Third Read ing so that we can take this aspect into consideration. Mr. Deputy Speaker , I should be looking up more often just to make sure that it is my friend, the Deputy

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 Speaker, in the Chair , so that I don't keep making this mistake. We have some rural members, Mr. Deputy Speaker, who will be expressing their concerns for the farm community and will be making their concerns kno wn in regard to this bill.

We do have some environmental problems that are rural in nature and I think this bill will adjust to them, but I would have to have it from the Minister absolutely giving us some assurance that it won't take away from the well-being of our rural members, the farming commun ity, the mainstay of our Province of Manitoba and they will be speaking on Third Reading. Mr. Deputy Speaker, there's no mention of some of the problems that we have with the environment, acid rain, which I know is an international problem.

We can't put jurisdiction over our American friends, but there are negotiations going on and there have to be some negotiations. I know that the Minister is attending a conference that will have something to do with acid rain. I believe that the conference starts tomorrow and I know that the Mi nister is the chairman of thi s particu lar conference. Maybe he can come back with some answers concerning acid rain and incorporate it into this environmental bill.

I know that the Minister has got a concern on mosquito control, which is part of the environment, the air part of the environment - looking after mosquito control gives him a problem. We 've got to protect the future. I would hope that something could be done - whether it comes under regulations. I would hope that these regulations would also come into being in the very, very next short time, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have had some discussion on radon and the Minister has stated that it's not too great a danger.

There are some differences of opinion as to whether there's a danger of radon gas and I would hope that this would be adjusted in the environment bill also and that might come under the regulation. So it appears, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that before we can proceed too far, and we're just going off on sort of one foot and bouncing on the other because we don't have the regulations yet to go with the bill, and the Minister is going to say, well, you know, regulations don't normally come in with the bill.

But I think it would be to the advantage of everybody, particularly those who want to support this bill, who want to see that the environment of the Province of Manitoba is protected, that these regulations are given before we pass the bill into Committee and into Third Reading. I really don't have too much more to say but, by and large, I am in support of the bill. It doesn't go quite far enough. I have some reservations about it. But it's been a long time in coming, and I'm glad that the Minister has taken some action wherein, rather than sitting on his chair, he has gotten up and taken some action.

I know that it's been a long time in coming and I do appreciate it to some extent with some reservatio ns, Mr. Deputy Speaker. With that, I would thank you for listening to my remarks. I hope the Minister would take it to heart so that, if there are some adjustments, particularly on the water supply for the City of Winnipeg and some of the problems that I mentioned concerning Churchill. I hope he would take that into consideration and make some adjustments in Committee Stage and at Third Rea ding. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portage. MR. E.

CONNERY: I move, seconded by the Mem ber for Morris, that debate be adjourned. MOTION presented and carried. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of the Environment, Bill No. 28, standing in the name of the Member for Emerson. MR. A. DRIEDGER: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Stand. Agreed? (Agreed) On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Community Services, Bill No. 35, standing in the name of the Member for Assiniboia. MR. R. NORDMAN: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Stan d.

Agreed and so � ordered. � On the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney General, Bill No. 38, standing in the name of the Member for Fort Garry. MR. C. BIRT: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sta nd. Agreed and so ordered. On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Health, Bill No. 40, standing in the name of the Member for Pembina. MR. D. ORCHARD: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Stand. Agreed and so ordered. On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Agriculture, Bill No. 41. MR. G. FINDLAY: Stand, Mr. Deputy Speaker. � MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Stand.

On the proposed motion of the Honourable Minister of Labour, Bill No. 42. MR. G. MERCIER: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Stand. On the proposed motion of the Honourable Attorney General, Bill No. 46. MR. G. MERCIER: Stand. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Stand. BILL NO. 47 -THE HUMAN RIGHTS CODE MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honourable the Attorney-General, Bill No. 47, standing in the name of the Member for Assiniboia. The Member for Lakeside. 3177

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 MR. H. ENNS: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker . I unde rstand that the Member for Assiniboia would have no objection if other members spoke to the bill. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill 47 with some trepidation because the position of those who speak in opposition to this bill find themselves very quickly labelled by others as being uncaring, or indeed oppr essive, undemo cratic. I choose these words from mail that I have received in the last several weeks . A MEMBER: Months. MR. H. ENNS: Several months - by those who are urging support for the bill.

I find it therefore somewhat ironic and I want to support my colleague, the Member for St. Norbert, who spoke earlier on this bill and who I believe made an extremely valid point that issues of the kind presented to us in this bill have in the main, by tradition in this Cham ber, allowed for what we refer to as a conscience item for individual members and I decry the fact that the Government Whip is on � government members and on an issue of this kind that ' the government in its wisdom did not see the appr opriateness for allowing individual members to speak their conscience with respect to the matter before us.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'm well aware that Bill 47 of cou rse is a re writing of the entir e huma n rig hts legislation that we have in Manitoba. I do not wish my opposition to a specific

section of the bill to be inter preted as speaking out against human rights per se. Although, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I take the opportunity to que stion this kind of legislation. Has it accomplished what it's set out to do, to do away with bigo try, discrimination, lack of respect for our fellow citizens? I'm reminded, Mr. Deputy Speaker, of a comment that my friend, the Memb er for Morris, from time to time reminds us all in this Cham ber.

Specifically when referring to legislation covering our own conflict-of interest legislation, that we can pass all the kinds of legislation that we wish in this area but we cannot legi slate integrity or hone sty. I make the same claim that we cannot really legislate the kind of care, the kind of compassion, that we could show to all our fellow citizens regardless of race, colour , creed, or whatever other definition of minority status is applicable from time to time.

I find when I read the daily newspapers the past year, since the introduction of this kind of legislation, not just here in Manitoba but throughout the countr y, I'm not satisfied that we have really raised the level of un der stand ing to have defused the tensions that sometimes erupt between different groupings of peoples within our society. But I make that as a comment only; I just raise the question. I suppose that there are indeed practical individual instances where the legislation being in place has prevented bla tant and outright discrimina tion and to that extent of course is worthwhile.

The issue that is, of course, troubling many of us in the Opposition, and I dare say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, many, many thousands of Mani tobans, is the major addition, the inclusion of sexual orientation in Bill 47, that causes us some difficulty. Mr. Deputy Speaker, a government, certainly in the introduction of the bill, other proponents of the measure, stress the fact again and again that enacting this kind of legislation does not necessa rily constitute support for or agains t the practice of homosexual ity.

In other words, they present it and ask us to react to it in a passive way, not challenging us to pass judgment on the practice that is being specifically covered by the inclusion of this measure in the act. Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I don't take issue with or read motives or intent to impute motives to those who take that position. I accept those statements as given. But what do those people, and what do I do as a committed Christian? And I'm immodest enough to say along with the vast majority of fellow citizens who profess adherence to that faith, how do they respond to this legislation? Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the homosexual community is not an identifiable commun ity. When we are talking about passing legislation to prevent discrimination against other minorities, the term usually emplo yed is visible minorities because of race or because of color. Homosexuals, as such, are currently provided all the protection of the law that anybody else receives in our society. It is therefore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the practice of homosexuality that is at issue. That is what's bothering me, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and botheri ng many, many thousands of other Manitobans. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we have heard from different religious leaders on this su bject matter and it should not surprise anybody that there is a variance of opinion. The opinion that is perhaps the most precise and clear is that of His Holiness the Pope, in speaking on behalf of the Catholic Church and the Catholic communit y. Mr. Deputy Speaker, the position of that religious organization is very clear. It was restate d, for the benefit of all members, by Archbishop Adam Exner just re cently and was widely quoted in our local news media. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, organizations, such as the Anglican Church, have let their views be known, and in my judgment have allowed their views to be somewhat distorted. Allow me to read, just briefly, from a position paper statement regard ing the question of homosexual orientation by the Anglican Chur ch , dated 19 79, somewhat dated, but the deba te is ongoing. (lnterje ction)-'79, Anglican Church. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I can profess to the same beliefs, as expressed in this document, when it says, "We believe, as Christians, that homosexual persons, as childr en of God, have full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love and acceptance, concern and pastoral care of the church. The gospel of Jesus Christ compels Christians to guard against all forms of human injustice and to affirm that all persons are brothers and sisters for whom Christ died. "It is clear from Holy Scripture that only the sexual union of male and female can find expressi on within the covenant of holy matrimony.

In the heart of biblical teaching about creat ion, we discover insights into the nature and purpose of sexuality rooted in God's creative purposes is the fulfillment and completion of male and female in each other, together with the appropriate function of sexual ity. "Thus, the church confines its nuptial blessings to heterosexual marria ges and we cannot authorize our clergy to bless homosexual unions. We are aware that some homosexuals develop for themselves relationships 3178

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 of mutual support, help and comfort, about which the church must show an appropriate concern . Such relationships, though, must not be confused with holy matrimony and the church must do nothing which appears to support any such sugges tion." Mr.

Deputy Speaker , my own community of Mennonite churches, bounded by the conference, known and referred to as the general conference, of which I believe the Minister of Trade and Tec hnology is an active member , has recently passed resolutions confirming the traditional position, if you like, of that church and that conference with respect to the practice of homosexualit y. We have in our constituenc y, in the community of Stonewall, a very active New Life Baptist Church and commun ity.

Pastor Ozirne y, who deserves a great deal of credit for the enthus iasm with which that congregation thrives in that community of Stonewall, has, I bel ieve, communic ated directly with the government through the Premier's office, and to me, expressing his deep concern about that church's position with respect to the practice of homosexuali ty. Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I know that the Attorney-General and others who will take issue with the comments that I am making by saying that is not the intention of this legislation or of this government to interfere overtly in the internal affairs of these church organizations, I would like to take them at their word, although I see no specific indication of that in the bill. I'm aware that the practice has been such that the Human Rights Commission in Manitoba and elsewhere, for instance, has not taken action against a church organization for refus ing to hire somebody for reasons of sex.

For instance, the ordination of women into the priesthood or into th e clergy , to the best of my knowledge, no human rights tribunal has interefered in what they perceive to be internal church busine ss and have allowed the chur ches to evolve their position, and it is an evolving position, as many of these social questions and positions no doubt will change.

I make these references to the position of different church organizations, major church organizations, because there are reasons, very strong reasons, for myself and for others to have a very deep and strong conviction of the sinfulness of the immorality and indeed the breaking of God's law by practising homosexual ity. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, just as from time to time in our secular world leadership can sometimes be out of touch with the body they are constituted to serve, and there are leaders in our religious organizations that are not always in step and always in tune with the very community that they are providing leadership for, but that does not change, in my opinion, how the vast majority of Christians feel about this issue and about this practice, and it's principally in that way that I wish to state my objections to this bill, as a Christian, and how this bill can make me do things or compel me to do things that, as a Christian, I have difficulty with, and it can happen in a thousand ways.

If I hold that belief that I just stated, that I quoted from, and I'm not taking issue with those who want to take issue with that belief - that can be debated and is being debated - but I can find myself in any number of situations like sitting on a board of trustees on a local organization that has a resp onsibility for hiring people, and I come to that meeting as a person who is going to approve or not approve of somebody's application, and I come to it with the convictions that I have about the suitability , the qua lifications of individuals that this private or public organization that I am an active member of, or that I want to belong to, that I am prepared to volunteer my time and services to, and if I want to express convictions of those people who entrusted me to that position of authority to carry out their wishes and do so in a way that contravenes the bill that's being proposed, you make an offender of me.

You make an offe nder of me for maintaining the convictions that I read ily admit and I'm not always all that proud of, or that I not always maintain the convenant that I have made with my God, but I say it to you and I put it on the public record: I am opposed to legislation that I can see will make me transgress a higher law that I have committed myself to.

I'm an owner of a building, of a housing unit, raising my fami ly, as I firstly want to do as an individual, but also to ensure, as all parents would want to, that the best influe nces, appropriate influences, normal • influences - if you wish me to use that term that upsets · ,. some people - prevailed and are exercised in my living environment, and I find myself in a position that we have some extra space, maybe an extra room or in a duplex, and it's rented out to a party that would appear to be an acceptable renter , but then later on I find out that person is pract ising a lifestyle that is not acceptable to me, as I read the legislation, I am not permitted to take offence at that, and I become the lawbreaker for merely carrying out some very deeply held convictions that I have.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, those who indicate that passing of this kind of legislation denotes no special status on our homosexual communi ty, well, perhaps they'r e right, but where the wrong is, the kind of onus they put on those of us who have strong convictions that are contrary to that kind of human behaviour, that kind of human act ion. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I don't see this provision in any specific way furthering the rights of the very community that it's meant to do so. We have had very am bivalent statements from the Attorney-General and from others • with respect to how broad the implications of this ,.

section will be. To what extent will this

section acknowledge homosexual unions? To what extent will this section, in the future, broaden the request to so acknowledge the practices that to many, many Manitobans are not accept able, and to many, many religious people are in fact abominable? So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I regret that the government has shown fit to introduce this particular

section into its overall human rights code. It will, in my judgment, do precisely the reverse that is expected of it. There is nothing in my heart that wants me to go out of my way to persecute, to discrimina te or to harass a person who has a sexual orientation that in my view is not correct biblical ly, genetically or morally. We live in a pluralistic soci ety, and I don't want to harass, hur t and oppress these people, but in introducing this kind of legislation, you will encourage and create a higher visibility of that practice, and I will tell you: As much as you attempt to do so, you will not change the majority of human nature's rea ction 3179

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 towards it . In that way, there will be more confronta tion with that community , there will be more ugly incidents with that community, and there will be less understanding and less sensitivity towards the reasons, whatever they may be, that put a relatively small minority of our citizens in that category.- (Interjection)- I won 't be around, but that often happ ens wit h the kind of legislati on that we pass. In fact, again, just this afternoon in the question period , I mean we ...

I'll wait till the jury 's out when the Minister of Transportation screws up his courage and starts showing us some reports , but if, in fact, that information is correct, th at we have not materiall y affected the death rate with respect to the intro duction of other legislation dealing with seat belts, it should not surpris e us when I make the claim that , all too often , l egislation that we introduce does not bring about desired results . Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, let me simply state that I object to the fact that any opposition made in the vein that I have made it, will of course be extremely labelled, in the media as small narrow-minded religious bigotry, knee-jerk reaction to a lifestyle that we're not comfortable with . Mr. Deputy Speaker, whatever they wish to do and however they wish to label it, I am satisfied that I speak on behalf of, initially in the first instance , a very substan tial majority of my constituents in the range of 95-96 percent, who actually took time to answer a survey question in this regard.

I reject totally, by the way, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the claim that is made by the community, that 10 percent of the population is gay or lesbian ; that is a fabrication totally unsupported , but it serves a purpose of creating an illusion of the need for serving a greater number of people . I suspect the actual numbers to be dramatically lower, in the 1 - 1 .5 percent range. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I spoke for a period as a Christian , let me speak for a moment as a cattleman .

These accidents of nature occur , these accidents of nature and I call them that , occur - let me now not speak as a Christian , let me speak of animals . I will speak of some, what we would refer to, condescendingly as lower animals, cattle , that I'm familiar with. If you put toge ther, as we do, several hundred or a thousand _, cattle beasts in a feedlot , occas ionally we come across one that is sexually disorientated.

If we don't take him out of the pen he will be ridden out of the pen , he will be killed in that pen .- (lnterjection)- Absolutely not , and that's why we evolved to a higher form of understanding, compassion, care and love.

But I reject absolutely and totally, to suggest that that becomes a lifestyle that is comparable to the lifestyle that was God-ordained if you like, genetically the only one explainable , and one for very understandable reasons , governments should be concerned about, with respect to maintaining the societies , the communities that we develop and build up, if you accept the fact that family is a basic building block upon which communities are bu ilt, upon which resources are developed, upo n which provinces and countries can flourish.

Anybody suggesting otherwise hasn't really thought through the consequences of pursuing that to its ultimate . If it's simp ly another lifestyle, a generation decides to revert to that lifestyle in totality, we have no following generation . do we? So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, there are very real and strong and acceptab le reasons - reas ons that I believe a very large number of Manitoban s support - my position, the position of the Opposit ion or those who are speaking in opposition to inclusion of this passage in this bill. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Portag e. MR. E.

CONNERY: Thank you , Mr. Deputy Speaker . Mr. Deputy Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill 47. I've read the bill through and I assure the membe rs that I'm opposed to discrimination and there 's sectors in here that I think are very strong and should be here and I want it on the record that I oppose very strongly , discrimination. But , Mr. Deputy Spea ker, I want to address the one area of sexual orientation . Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is very difficult for me to address this subject because I have personal friends of mine that are homosexual.

And I know some of the trauma that they go through, some of the problems that they have with their sex orientation and the lifestyle that they have to go through is not a good lifestyle. So I have some real emotion and some real sympathy for these people. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we also employ a large number of workers on our farm and we have had homosexual workers, both gay and lesbians and we knew they were . And, Mr. Deputy Speaker , they were not discriminated against and no one is allowed to discriminate against them on our farm .

But, I can say that the individual did cause some problems because of his actions with some of the workers, but he was not fired for these actions and it was discussed with him, some little pressure put on to keep his sexual orientation away from the work environment. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I look through the bill and on page 9 where it discusses discrimination, "differential treatment of an individual on the basis of the individual's actual or presumed membership in or association with some class or group of persons rather than on the basis of personal merit." Later on, Mr.

Deputy Speaker , I'll explain why I have some difficulty with the personal merit part of that sector because personal mer it alone in some instances, I don't think will suffice. We discussed the merits , Mr. Deputy Speaker, on one and it says, "implicit in the above principle is the right of all individuals to be treated in all matters sorely on the basis of their personal merits and to be accorded equality of opportunity with all other individuals ." Mr. Deputy Speaker, as the previous speaker mentioned many good points , what about the rights of others and the beliefs of others?

Do they not have some merit also in this whole discrimination? There was one other in the bill that I thought was kind of interesting and it's called the meaning of sexual orientation. And it says, " sexual orientation means heterosexual , homosexual or bisexual and refers only to consenting adults acting within the law." It's consenting adults , at what stage of life does a person become a homosexual. Is it only at the age of 18 that they do become a homosexual? So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it leaves a little bit of unsureness for me in this area .

We have to understand the rights of others when we talk about sexual orientation. What about people that 3180

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 have a duplex - and it was mentioned by the member before me - someone that has a duplex and rents it out to a couple that are homosexual. They have a common backy ard, being in a duplex, and naturally you would have some sort of evide nce of their orientation - and they have a young family. Mr. Deputy Speaker, is this something that we have to say to the individuals, you cannot, stop. You have to allow your children to view a lifestyle that is not normal. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I don't think that we should be forcing people into this. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in the teaching profession - and I could imagine there are homosexuals in the teaching profession today - but because it is frowned upon somewhat there is not open evidence of their sexual orientation. So the chil dren don't see it and don't view it as a normal lifestyle, but if this bill goes through and this

section of the bill goes through, then we have some problems with that now becoming a lifestyle that society accepts. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I don't accept that lifestyle. It is an immoral, it's unwholly and it's an unclean lifestyle but unfortunately , as the member said before me, that it is

an act of nature. And it's not a kind act of nature, it happens to some individuals. But percentage wise I don't know, but it's a cruel and unkind act to people who are born homosexual. I don't think homosexuals in most cases should be discriminated against. But there are instances I think the rights of others have to be respected . A homosexual should have all the rights to medical, to work - as I said we hire people on their merit and not on their sexual orientation - but there are certain things that affect lifestyles that I think we have th e righ t to determine for ourselves.

I am somewhat concerned that the Opposition House Leader or the Attorney-General have not allowed members opposite to have a free and open vote on this discussion, because I know there are members over there that are horrified with this bill and their opportunity and their abil ity to represent their constituents properly in this Legislature has been throttled by the Attorney-General. But that's not unusual because he also has not proclaimed The Freedom of Information Act. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: A point of order being raised by the Attorney -General. HON. R.

PENNER: Ye s, I've been accused in debate in this House a moment ago of throttling other persons' point of view or right to express themselves. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have stated and I'll state again for the record , that is totally inaccurate. Everyone on this side of the House who wants to speak on this bill is free to do so and express their individual concerns. That's more than the dispute on the facts, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that is a misrepresentation and I want it on the record that it's a misreprese ntation. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: There are certain rules in the House among them, Rule 40.( 1) . no member shall speak disrespec tfully or use offensive langua ge against the House, or against any member thereof. MR. E. CONNERY: Did I say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, something that was off ensive? HON. R. PENNER: Ye s, you said that I had thr ottled people's rights. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Member for Portage. MR. E. CONNERY: I assume then by the Attorney General's statement that member s opposite can get up and speak on the bill and can speak in opposition to the bill if they so determine.

Because I know that there are mem bers on that side of the House who are not in favour of this bill, and their religious upbringing does not allow them, their church does not allow them to support it. Yet we see somebody, who I don't belie ve has any chur ch affiliation at all, saying to Christians, you can't speak out against that bill. That is immoral and is not proper in this Legislature. Mr. Deputy Speaker, before I grasped with this bill to some degree, I had my own feel ings on it, but also I represent a constituency and I went back to that constituency and asked for their advice. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we also had a poll and in the poll I'll accept that the question sai d, "Would you grant special legislation for homosexuals?" And somewhere over 90 percent of the respondents said, no. I've rece ived letters from church people; I've received letters and phone calls from individuals within my constituen cy. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I did not have one respondent who said tha t they were in favour of the sexual orientation part of this bill, not one. So, Mr . Deputy Spea ker, we don't have an overw helming flood of people saying, yes, leave it in.

Most of them are saying, no, take it out; we do not want this bill. So I am represe nting my constituency when I speak in opposition to that

section of the bill. Mr. Deputy Speaker, what happens if we condone this sexual orientation? Because if we make it an alternate lifestyle, do we say to people that it is fine to be homosexual? What will this do to our communit y? Will it then have other people viewing it as being a good alternate lifestyle that we will have more people becoming homosexuals? MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order please. Rule 44.(1): "No member shall engage in private conversation in such a manner as to interrupt the business of the House." The Member for Portage la Prairie. MR. E. CONNERY: I guess, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, members opposite are very sensitive because they'v e been throttled and not been allowed to have free speech on a very, very important bill that can affect this commun ity, our province, for many, many years to come or forever. So I can understand their sensitivity to it. But if we allow this lifestyle and we allow it to be an acceptable alternative lifestyle, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we will see an incr ease in homosexualit y. We will see young people viewing it as an accep table lifestyle, moving in that direction before they'd had an opportunity to really understand their own sexual orientation. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, there are two groups of people within this debate that I think we have to recognize. I belie ve and I firmly believe that there are people who 3181

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 were born homosexuals, and that have no ability to change their sexual orientation. We have seen homosexuals who have married, and I know of instances where they've married, raised a family and just could not take the sexual - it wasn't a happy marriage sexually . It was a good lifestyle, but their sexual orientation just didn't work, and went and came out of the closet, so to speak, and entered the homosexual commun ity.

But there are others who have chosen to be homosexuals, and in this last while we have been inundated with people from the homosexual community, lobbying us in this building, trying to convince us to support the bill for sexual orientation. What really bother ed me, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was one individual, a lady, who was a professed lesbian, said that she had been married, divorced, entered into a heterosexual rela tionship, had a child, had many heterosexual relationships, but decided she maybe would like the lesbian lifestyle a little better. Wel l, I'll tell you, this totally put me out on the issue, Mr.

Deputy Speaker. If we make it a well accepted lifestyle, will we have people choosing - choosing - to be homosexual, and if we ever permit that to happen in our society, then we have gone to the bottom rung of the ladder . This government and this Attorney General is prepared to encourage a lifestyle that is not good. So my concern is: How do we give some support to those who really were born that way, an accident of nature, to have a reaso nable lifestyle without affecting the community at large?

And as I said, they should not be discrimina ted against from having a job, from having medical attention and all those things in life, but some other people who are opposed to that lifestyle should have the right to say no, we don't want to be exposed to it and we don't want our childr en exposed to it. (lnterjection)- I've read the bill, yes I have, and maybe a little more thoroughly than you did. You and I even oppose people who call us short but they do, and we accept it because we are. That's a form of discrimination. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in the case of Big Brothers and Big Sisters, we don't see men being Big Sisters to girls and, conversely, we don't see women being Big Brothers to boys, and I guess maybe there's a reason for that. Now, should we have homosexuals, well should we have - mem bers opposite laugh, and I guess they can laugh in their misguided

interpretation of right or wrong. They laugh, and that's fine.- (Interjection)- That's right. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we saw in the States where a group were forced to take homosexuals in as Big Brothers. I think these are some of the areas that we of society have the right to say no to. There are instances where we have to have these rights, and it's unfortunate but it has to be. So, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, if we could amend the bill or have some additions to the sexual orientation, there are certain areas I agree with, that I think we need to elimina te discrimination, but there are a lot of other areas that we have to leave our own human rights, personal rights, the rights of the communi ty, the rights of parents to defend and support their own moral and religious opinions. As the member before me said, we do make commitments to a higher being, to our God, and we do have the obliga tion to support some of those obligations. So, Mr .

Deputy Speaker , I am thank ful for the opportunity to put my thoughts in the record . I am concerned. I wish the Attorney-General would allow members opposite a free and open vote, an open discussion on this issue because I would like to hear some of the true feel ings of members opposite, who have a very deep religi ous backg round and understanding. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MR. M. DOLIN: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I rise in support of the bill, and I rise also in response to the Member for Portage la Prairie who asked for the expression of true feelings. I would certainly like to give my true fe elings, as I believe the Member for Lakeside did, as I'm not too sure about the Member for Portage la Prairie who seemed to relate the constant misinformation that has been promulgated by various sectors of the press and by various people who do not like to see equality in our society. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I would like to run through the act itself and what the act does because, so far, the two Opposition members who have spoken dwelt on one particular sect ion of the act. This is an important act for all Manitobans, because the intent of this act is in certain defined categ ories. Let me read the defined categories so members opposite understand where this act applies. The act applies in employment; it applies in rental housing; it applies in public services; it applies in public contr acts; it applies in the purchase of property and emplo yment adver tising. Now this is where the act applies.

It is reasonably specific that it applies in those circums tances and those circumstances alone, as defined in the act. The Big Brother situation, the example used by the Member for Portage, is not covered here. That is a voluntary service that is not covered under the act in any man ner, shape or form. It is a red herring to use Big Brothers as an example of where discrimination would not be allo wed , so Big Brothers who are inappropriate for little brothers would be forced under the act to be hired by the Big Brothers organization to deal with a little brother.

That is absolutely not the case under the act, and the act is very clear on that. If the Member for Portage read the-act as well as he said he read the act, which I find hard to bel ieve from his comments, he would understand that. I would also like to point out some of the other categories and attribut es of individuals in this province which are dealt with under the act. There is religion, which will be defined to include creed and also religious belief, association or activi ty. There is sex, which will specifically include circums tances related to pre gna ncy, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Political belief will be expanded to include political associa tion or activity. The basic rights of Manitobans in respect to harassment - not just sexual harassment - but harassment because of any of the attributes defined under the act now becomes an offense. MR. H. ENNS: I might change my mind. You're harassing me right now. 3182

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 MR. M. DOLIN: Sorry about that. The Honourable Member for Lakeside says I'm harassing him. Perhaps he may consider harassment my simple attempt, given his years of experience in this House, to edify him and edu cate him on the mis statements and the misunderstanding he had of the act in his statements before. I will also deal with the matter of religion and homosexualit y which the member seems to have misinterpr eted the churc h's position from the statements that I will read to him from the church.

Perhaps he should reconsider some of his statements and perhaps maybe re think the position he took, because it is not based on what is in the act. It is not based on the position as stated by the church, and it is not based on reali ty. Further areas of discrimination: contract compliance provisions will enable the Government of Manitoba, where appropriate, to make affirmative act ion a requirement of firms contracting with the province.

Advisory opinions - now this is a very important clause - from the Hu man Rights Commission will assist Mani tobans - and this is particularly relevant to the business communi ty - where a given practice or policy is accep table. So

whereas the Member for Portage mentions, in hiring or firing or se tting certain em ployment standards within a job situation, where an em ployer is unsure that a case does not have to come before the Human Rights Commission to be tried under the law, that the empl oyer has to find himself under public opprobrium but the emplo yer can go and say, I'm considering putting in such and such a practice in regard to, for example, Mexican labou rers. What do I do to make sure that I am fair under the act, that I am treating these people as equal citizens before the law and before God? The Human Rights Commission can now say, Mr. Emplo yer, here is what you would have to do and, if you do (

a) and (b), you would not be within the act but we can give you some advice on how you do that to ensure that all the people of Manitoba have the same rights in the categories defined under the act, as I pointed out, employment, rental housing, contract compliance, etc. I think that's very important for the busine ss community so they don't end up in situations where they are unknowingly discriminating against somebody, where they think they're doing the right thing and find thems elves in a courtroom when they find that they were wrong, as some of the members opposite have been wrong in their

interpretations of the act. I think if they acted on the statements that I've heard from the Member for Lakeside and the Member for Portage La Prairie, if they acted on those statements, they might find themselves going contrary to the law. And I think maybe - you know, I have no question that they would be operating with sincere intent and trying to be fair and good and they may not be doing that. This way, they can get an advisory opinion where people can explain to them what the act actually means and how it is to be applied. There are changes in the act of membership on the Human Rights Commission.

There's a permanent panel of adjudic ators set up. I think the basis for this act and we have been dwelling - and I will get into that one category, which seems to be the most contentious catego ry, and that is the matter of sexual orientation. The basis of this act is very simple, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We, as a government, believe that Manitobans are fair. We believe that Manitobans believe in equal rights and opportunities for a job, for renting an apartment, for using public services to all people, regardless of their religion, regardless of their race.

We also believe, as the Member for Portage pointed out, the Conservative Party sent out a biased report, saying would you - it was a survey. It was their equivalent to the Gallup Poll. We ll this was no Gallup Poll, it wasn't even a trot poll or a canter poll, it was a backward walking poll. This poll told them: Would you like special rights for homosexuals? You could replace the word "ho mosexuals" by any other group in society, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

You could replace it by Christians, by Jews, by blacks, by orientals, and people in this society do not want special rights for any group, nor does this act promote or propose that. What this act does, it says everybody shall have an equal opportunity and an equal right to take a chance at the go od life in this soci ety. Nobody shall be discrimina ted against because of the attributes that t they have as a person, be it skin colour, religion, race, political orientation, sexual orientation or the other attributes defined in the act. Mr . Deputy Spe aker, let me gi ve a quo te.

The Manitoba Association of Rights and Liberties, the President, Harry Peters, in a letter from the president, says: "Contrary to what you may have heard from the critics of Manitoba's new Human Rights Code, it does not confer special rights upon any persons, but rather ends them. It ends the special rights of homophobes to discrimina te against gays and lesbians.

It ends the special rights of empl oyers to se xually harass employees." He also points out: ". . . a right employers have enjoyed since our Court of Appeal ruled last year that our present code does not prohibit such conduct." He also points out: "Archbishop Exner," who was quoted by the Honourable Member for Lakeside, "has stated, 'The fear of Catholics that their church will be forced, under the Code, to let homosexuals become or stay priests and nuns.' Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Code clearly provides for a limited amount of differential treatment, where the views of lifestyles • of a certain person or potential emplo yee run contrary • to the honestly held religious beliefs of another person or emp loyer.

The new Code will no more force the Catholic Chur ch to accept homosexuals as church leaders than the present Human Rights Act would force a Jewish congregation to accept a Catholic as their rabbi." Now if one does not believe the opinions of the Attorney-General , of various chu rch gr oups, the Anglicans, etc., or members from this side of the House, I would like to read from a rather lengthy letter , which is entitled: "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the pastoral care of homosexual pers ons." I will point out that the letter very clearly states: "A person engaging in homosexual behaviour acts immorally." I have no argument with that being a principle and a statement of the Catholic Church.

I would further go on to say and quote from this letter, which says: "It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice of speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind 3183

Wednesd ay, 17 June, 1987 of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy soci ety. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law." It goes on further to say, "We encourage the Bishops then to provide pastoral care, in full accord with the teaching of the church, for homosexual persons of their diocese." What the Catholic Chur ch seems to be saying - and I will give you the author of this letter.

This letter, for the edification of the Member for Portage la Prairie, by the way, was cir culated by one of our religious Catholic members on this side of the House who had taken the trouble to research the position of the Catholic Chur ch on this issue. This was done during an audience granted to the unde rsigned prefect . His Holiness, Pope John 11, approved this letter, adopted in an ordinary session of the Congr egation for the Doctrine of Faith, and ordered it to be published, given at Rome, 1 October 1986, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect .

The position in the Catholic Church, I think, is very similar to what we are attempting to do in the act, and the offence I take at the distortions being made by members of the public who are trying to create an impression that somehow different and special rights and a condonation, a support of a homosexual lifestyle, is intrinsic to this act is blatantly false. It is also blatantly against what is the doctrine stated by the Pope's emis sary in the fact that the dignity of each individual shall be respect ed.

What we are doing in this Human Rights Act is taking the position that we are enforcing in law, as stated in the letter , which is our resp onsibility as legisla tors, we are taking the responsi bility for ensuring all Manitoba citizens have equal rights under the law. No special rights. We are not singling out any particular group. And I fail to understand why members opposite, when you look at the act, which defines the attributes that are covered under the act, why they single out this particular group as having special rights. There are a numb er of other groups.

We talk about race, we talk about religion, we talk about political belief, we talk about a number of other areas, pregn ancy, etc., which were also attribut es as defined in the act. Why is the Opposition and members of the more irresp onsible public, who seem to agree with the Opposition's attempt to discredit this legislation, why are they saying that there are no special rights given to those particular people with those attributes? Why are they not saying that black people are somehow getting special rights under the act?

Why are they not saying religious minorities such as Menn onites are getting special rights under the act? Because they also are included and protected under the act. I would point out, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that the case being made by the Opposition . . . MR. H. ENNS: We are all people, but some practise immoral acts. We are all people. MR. M. DOLIN: The Honourable Member for Lakeside says they're all people, but some people practise immoral acts. He is absolutely correct and I do not deny one whit what he is saying.

However, this act does not deal with morality and does not deal with the private morality of individuals in their own private lives. We are not saying in this act that homosexuals who practise their lifestyle publicly, allowably and in circums tances where they will proselytize other people. There is a

section in the act which prevents emplo yees from doing things agains t the wishes of their employer within the codes as set up by the emplo yer. You know, the member says that somehow this is condoning homosexuality . It's doing nothing of the kind. There is a term that the Member for Lakeside used during his address, and I believe it was a sincere address, and the Member for Portage la Prairie used, which is a commonly known expression - it's called "in the closet ." Homosexuals, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are said to be in the closet. Has the Member for Lakeside ever thought why, Mr.

Deputy Speak er, are homosexuals in the closet? Because they are afraid. They are living in a situation of fear. They are afraid to stand up and say: I have a lifestyle which is not popular; I have a lifestyle which is not acceptable to the general heterosexual commun ity. Therefore, I will be beaten up; I will be refused a job; I will be refused rental accom modation; I will be refused public services. So what do I do? I will hide in the closet.

I would suggest to the Honourable Member for Lakeside that what we are saying is we do not condone the lifestyle, but do not allow, in a free society, an individual to have to live in a state of fear. Be he black or of a different religion, or Oriental, or be this person a female, this is an intolerable situation in a free soci ety. I think the Member for Lakeside, when he used the example of his cattle, if there was a cow in his herd, or a bull, who was of a different lifestyle, that bull or cow would be driven out of the herd, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I could not help myself from commenting across the hall: "Is this the way that men and women should live?" And the Member for Lakeside was somewhat taken aback, Mr. Deputy Speaker. He said, "Oh no, these are dumb beas ts, brute animals; we are above that." We ll, what I am saying is what this act does is bring us above that.

We will now allow, in a free society, if this act is passed , anybody to have to fear when they go for a job or when they use the public service or when they want to rent an acco mmodation that is rentable to the public, and this includes people whose lifestyles you and I do not approve of. I do not approve of that lifestyle, but nevertheless they have a perfect right to live that lifestyle. There's a saying from William James that every man and woman in society has a right to swing their arm, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but your right to swing your arms ends where my nose begins.

What I am saying and what this act is saying is yes, we are condoning and giving people the right to swing their arm. I have no right to tell somebody what their lifestyle should be or what their religion should be or what their morality should be. They have a right to do that as long as they do not interfere with me, and I have no right to interfere with them. What members opposite seem to be saying is they wish to impose their morality on the rest of us, their religious beliefs. I respect their religious beliefs, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I am not a Christian, but I believe that there is an importance in distinct, moral values in the 3184

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 teaching of Jesus Christ and Christiani ty, and those who uphold that faith, I think are the pillars of this socie ty. But I do not bel ieve that tea chin gs bel ieve in discrimination. I do not believe the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, the Mennonite Church, the United Church or any Christian Church supports discrimination agains t another person. They believe in helping a person; they believe in treating people as equal. They believe in treating individuals with dignity, Mr. Deputy Speaker, which is what we are attempting to do in this legislation.

To continue to suggest otherwise that somehow, because this lifestyle is abhorrent to me, or the Member for Lakeside, or the Memb er for Portage, that individuals in this society who - I think even the Member for Portage recognizes - do not necessarily have a choice in developing this lifestyle, that we somehow should condemn them and abuse them and beat them up and refuse them jobs and refuse them accom modations and refuse them public services which we consider ours and are paid for by all taxpayers, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I think if members opposite thought in a good Christian manner and a moral manner , they might re think their opinions.

The Member for Portage sugge sts that we are somehow browbeating the more religious people on this side, that I, particul arly, as Whip, am beat ing people into submission so we will all be like sheep on this side of the House supporting this bill when our moral code prohibits us from doing that. (Madam Speaker in the Chair.) We ll, I suggest to you that's balderdash; and I also suggest to you that we have moral people of all religious persuasions on this side of the House who recognize the values and the teaching of their religion.

And I do not kno w one religion in the world that comes immedia tely to mind that believes that all men are not equal and all women are not equal, and all men have the same rights and deserve the same chances in this society. I think everybody on this side of the House beli eves that. I hope to God that everybody on the other side of the House belie ves that. Because if you operate on tha t code, I would suggest to members opposite that maybe think a little more about what you're saying about special rights for this group; special rights for that group; when the act says nothing of the kind.

And when we are not proposing that. What we are saying is any child born in Manitoba, or any person who immigrates into this province should have exactly the same rights in employment, in public services, in rental acc ommodations. The Member for Lakeside used an example, if he had a duplex and he wanted to rent the side of the duplex. And the Member for Portage la Prairie picked up on it and talked about homosexuals in his backyard. What, fairies in his garden, I don't know what he's talking about.

What he's saying is, "I shouldn't have to rent to those people." We ll the fact is, I have heard the same arguments over the years with rentals to non whites. I've heard the same arguments of rental to people with other religions. Those arguments are unfair in a free soci ety.

If you are putting an acc ommodation for rental on the market in the public domain, then a person who passes certain criteria of being able to pay the rent, of being of go od moral character, of not damaging the property, whatever their religion, race, sexual orientation, sex or what-have-you, they have a right to rent that appartment and we are going to, by legislation ensure that they have that right. How in God's name would the Member for Lakeside know the person he's renting to is homosexual?

Does he want them to wear yellow arm bands as they did during the Second World War when the Nazis forced them to do that? Is that what he wants? Or as the Mayor from Calgary wanted them to have pink lapel buttons or something to identify themselves. That's absurd. Homosexuals of either sex do not look any different than you or I, Madam Speaker, they do not act any different. They are people who have a different sexual orientation, they dress as we do, they work at the same jobs as we do, they ride the buses the same way we do, and they rent acc ommodations the same way we do.

And they have a right to do that, Madam Speaker. They have an absolute right. jl I walk down the street , Madam Speaker, and I see • people on the street with funny hair cuts and earri ngs, and black leather jackets. This is not a lifesty le I approve of. I don't know whether they'r e homosexual, or punk or whatnot. If I don't like, I don't have to dress that way. They have a perfect right as citiz ens in this society to dress any way they want within the law or to operate in any way they want within the law as the act clearly points out.

For members of the Opposition to say because I don't like the way somebody looks, he should stop looking that way, is offensive to me. If the Member for Lakeside would suggest to me as an analogy to that, if he didn't like renting to somebody with dark skin, should he have the same right to do that because it is offensive to him? That is the analogy that comes very clear to my mind. I believe the Member for Lakeside is a more decent, honest person than that. And I truly believe the religious tenets that he discussed and that he brought out, he actually believes in.

What I would suggest to him then is go back and read the act more carefu lly. There are no special rights in the act. There jl are equal rights, there are equal rights for rural people, • for urban people, for black people, for white people, for yellow people, for red people, for men, for women, for people of heterosexual orientation, of homosexual orientation, for people of any religion you want to name because this, Madam Speaker, is Manitoba. This is not Russia, this is not Chile, this is Manitoba. This is a free democratic society.

We on this side of the House are taking not only a correct position, and an honest position, but a moral position. And I strongly urge members from the other side of the House to stop trying to distort reali ty. Stop trying to make this legislation into something it is not. This legislation is what it says, it is a Human Rights Act to prevent discrimination. It is not

an act to give special rights to any group in soci ety. All people in this society are created equal and we will pass this legislation and force that all Manitobans - even the Member for Sturgeon Creek - are treated equa lly. Madam Speaker, I hope further comments from members opposite are a little more informed, that they do a little more research on the act than the two 3185

Wednesd ay, 17 June, 1987 speakers we have seen up to now. Because, Madam Speaker, I do not think it will wash in the public - in the media it certainly hasn't washed and the two major papers in the City of Winnipeg have condemned the fallaciousn ess of the arguments brought forth by the Leader of the Opposition who was speaking for his caucus, I assume. What he is saying is give this matter a special right. I would hope that the members opposite would start looking at the legislation as it really is. The Member for St. Norbert started to do that before he drifted off into the same kind of bias in his opening remarks. The fact is, yes, this is

an act, it is a fairly comprehensive act, it has clauses which may affect certain gr oups or individuals like the business commun ity, landlords, people who want to rent various situations, condominium owners. It may affect them in certain ways which I think it is our respon sibility as legislators to make sure this act does what it is purporting to do and that's provide lair treatment for all Manitobans, and no discrimination against any Mani tobans.

Now, if members on the opposite side would get off 1 this hobby horse of special rights and stop trying to make black into white, which it is not and deal with the specifics of the bill, we could probably pass the best piece of any discrimination legislation ever seen in Canada and set an example not only for Canada, for all of North America and maybe all of the free world. I encourage members opposite to stop fooling around and start dealing with the rea lities. Get off the homosexual hobby horse because it is not a special rights situation.

It is no more special rights than any other attribute as defined in the attributes in the act. So, Madam Speaker, with those remarks I felt it was incumbent upon me to put that on the record. There is no, somehow evil force on this side of the House to get people to do things they don't want to do. We have discussed this openly and freely in honest debate, in caucus.

We have taken a principal position of people coming from different religious backgrounds and from different ethnic backgrounds and different orientations as far as work and national origin and we have come to a conclusion as a caucus that this is the best piece of legislation that we can put on the table for all the people of Manitoba to provide them with a situation where they will not have to be in fear of discrimination in a workplace, in rental accommodations, in public services or in other areas as defined by the act.

Madam Speaker, I commend this act to the House and I urge Opposition members to think a little more carefully before they start condemning on fallacious matters. Thank you very much. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Mor ris. MR. C. MANNESS: Thank you very much, Madam Spea ker. I too wish to join the debate on Bill 47. The Member for Kildonan encou raged members of this side of the House to join the debate, and to paraph rase him, with a little bit more thought, I think is what he said.

In listening to him fairly carefully, Madam Spe aker, one would come to the conclusion that what the Member for Kildonan is saying is, you will not have 3186 that clearer thought, clearer understanding, you will not be able to convince us that you're right unless you agree with us. It seems what the Member for Kildonan is saying because he took deli berate pains to attack almost each and every one of us that has spoken on this bill so far.

So, Madam Speaker, I then say to the Member for Kildonan, I suppose I will disappoint him also because believe me, some of the things that have been said by members of the Opposition to this point in time will be reiterated in some respect by myself. I admit, Madam Speaker, I haven 't researched this area. Quite frankly can you research this area? How do you research this area? -(lnterject ion)- We ll, Madam Speaker, the Minister of Education tempts me and tells me to read the Bible. Of course, I think there will be members here who will quote from Leviticus in due course.

Ye t, I tell you, Madam Speaker , we're quite aware that the members opposite would love to have us quote the Bible over and over again in this debate. We understand that. Madam Speaker, were we outside of this forum, were we in front of the public in a broader context, I would gladly quote the Bible, because I'm a believer in it and I follow it. I'm not fully understanding of it and I'm not an overly pious person, but I understand it in many respects and believe me, I subscribe to many of the basic religious laws that are written within it.

So I say to the Minister of Education when he tempts me to quote the Bible, Madam Speaker, there'll be another time, there'll be another forum. Madam Speaker, homosexuality is and does occur obviously within our families, either closer or farther. I can say that within my family it's maybe cl oser. So when the member challenges me to do res earch, how does one do research when they live with it in a fashion? Madam Speaker, the Attorney-General attempts to make the view and the discussion very black and white - very simple - in my under standing.

He puts it purely in the words that would lead one to say, or try to judge the issue, on the basis of discrimination. Again, paraphrasing, should a person, should a practising homosexual, be fired for that practise alone? Madam Speaker, when I listened to the Attorney-General very carefu lly during his Second Read ing of the bill that seemed to be what he was saying to me - represe nted the rationale for the inclusion of this particular se ction.

Madam Speaker, it's why, in my view, my church, the United Chur ch of Canada, in many respects supports - when I say the church, I'm talking about the execu tive of the church - the government in this view. Indeed, I had an opportunity just last week to pose the very direct qu es tion to mem bers of my conference specifically dealing with Bill No. 47 as to why they took the decision they did in support of it. Madam Speaker, they quoted almost the identical rationale as was offered by the Attorney-General when he brought forward the bill. It's the one of discrimination.

Quite frankly, when the Member for Kildonan says, don't make it a black-and-white issue, allow there to be some grey areas, some compromise, I find that fal ling somewhat out of the attempted consistency that was laid before us by the Attorney-General. Because when the Attorney-General uses the rationale to that question, should a person be fired because they're identifiable, practising homosexuals?

Wednesd ay, 17 June, 1987 To me that isn't very much a black-and-white issue. That's why the executive in my church, for instance, is a supporter of the bill. Because they would say nobody should be fired without just cause and just cause certainly is not being a practising homosexual. Madam Speaker, I can accept the process of that argument, quite frank ly. I can see that how if you are going to argue at that plane or at that level it becomes a yes or no question.

If that's where the members opposite, the government, who have been convinced, and I dare say pressured in some respects, by the Attorney-General and other sup porters that th e argument should be based at that plane, at that level, then, Madam Speaker, I can see why the majority of them to this point, at least those that have spoken, would be in support of the bill. My colleagues have attempted to say something else.

They've attempted to ask these questions, to what extent will the courts confer greater rights upon homosexuals because of the very simple - and I say that in fairness - inclusion of the sect ion dealing with homosexuality? We 're asking, does this legislation confer greater rights upon homosexuals than it contempla tes, than indeed the Attorney-General contemplates, than inde ed any person who wants to argue the question on the basis of strict discrimination as to whether one should be fired or not?

Madam Speaker, that's our concern, that's why I rise today in my place to try and again expound upon that very real concern, not only in the minds of many of my constituents who, by the way, based on the very same questions, the very same survey that other members of this side have commented about, are 90 percent in favour of not exten ding rights beyond those that exist today. Madam Speaker, the question is, what flows from this act? What are we going to be asked to pass, which somehow outside of the power of this Legislature is going to be interpreted in a somewhat different fashion?

As the Member for Lakeside says, interpret it in a fashion that is totally against the theological laws and the religious laws that have much import to him and, indeed, I daresay, to myself. Because, Madam Speaker, if we don't ask those questions, quite frankly, we are doing a disservice to lawmaking and I daresay we are doing a disservice to our constituents who are, in the vast majority for whatever reason, not wanting us to support the law.

The fact that some of us may be out of favour with the editorial writers of the Winnipeg Free Press and other media, Madam Speaker, doesn't really bother us a lot because, quite frankly, I think we learned long ago that if you're with people - and people have views on this, not because of something the Opposition has done, to go out and hold meetings like we've done in our taxat ion meet ings to whip up public fury - (Interjection)- That's right, this is a different issue. Everybody has an issue, has a view on this, and every body's view, whether it's researched or not, has full value.

Madam Speaker, what fears us the most today is the liberal

interpretations that are being given to most of our statutes outside of the authority of this House. Until and unless the Attorney-General can tell us how it is, for instance, that teachers - and I'll tell you, Madam Speaker, I've had many calls on this, particularly with respect to teachers - who in some subtle fashion, however subtle, begin to promote that lifestyle within a cla ssroom, how it is they can be removed from their position, Madam Speaker.

Unless the Attorney-General can tell me how the classroom can be safeg uarded from an abnormal practice, then, Madam Speaker, I cannot support the bill, because the underlying theory is th at everybody respects the classroom, that everybody who is in a place of authority and everybody who's a role model will do the right thing, that they will not try to impose upon their class their views. As ideal as the world would be, Madam Speaker, we know that the world doesn't work that way.

Madam Speaker, you, in going through the public school system , myself in going through the public school system, indeed those in this group who have gone through private schools, know whatever person is before them instructing, lecturing will in some sense impa rt their values into that cl ass. In all, some of my constituents are aski ng, are in those cases where a practising homosexual who is now teaching their childr en in some subtle form begins to show those � childr en that indeed the practice in which they are ,. eng aged is not only accep table, it is also normal and it is protected by law, Madam Speaker.

Therefore they take more liberties within that classroom than they are allowed. Madam Speaker, then the Attorney-General has to tell me how those childr en are protected. We ll, the Attorney-General says it's a specious argument. I'll save it for another debate when we are maybe debating humanism and I don't know if we ever will, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, the Member for Kildonan chastises my colleague, the Member for Lakeside, when my colleague used the analogy of the cattle on his farm. He asks, are we not higher than that? Wel l, of course we are, Madam Speaker, but how much higher are we?

As society, how much higher are we? Madam Speaker, the members opposite talk about beaten wives. They talk about a society who turns its back on a whole host of areas and the more that they can identify the problems, the quicker the laws are passed and inde ed the greater the tax measures are in support of the oppressed. Ye t, Madam Speaker, what .. do we see in society? We see larger homes being built ,. for smaller families and people totally turning their back on the commun ity, expec ting government to do it. So, when the Member for Kildonan says, are we not higher than that? I question how high we are.

The NDP Party should know better than most, because they're the ones who practise this political class warfare, Madam Speaker. They work that system. They use it to their advantage in the political fashion, particularly in the area of economic classes. They make people belie ve they're downtrodden because of the wealth. Madam Speaker, it seems to me that they who use class warfare at its highe st level will fully realize that maybe not this generation but generations to come are going to have their own reason for lashing out somewhere. They always have in history and they always will, Madam Speaker.

We 're not an awful lot more civilized today than we were 1, 000 years ago and people will lash out because there will always be problems; there will always be shortc omings. There will always be reasons why they hav en't risen, Madam Speaker, to the level that they want to achieve. People will reach 3187

Wednesday, 17 June, 1987 out and lash out and history, whether its biblical or otherwise, teaches us one thing: The people who they will lash out almost firstly against is the homosexual communi ty. Madam Speaker, what's my point? My point is this: That if a person is of good will and a person has a good heart, and a person understands the value and the worth of a fellow person and they are an emplo yer, they do not need a law to tell them that that person who's identified as a homosexual and who is probably contributing good work in that workplace, no law is needed to protect that person.

Because a person who is good in heart and good in spirit, it will make no difference to that person, and that person will provide a continuous level of emplo yment for that empl oyee. But on the other hand, Madam Speaker, in our midst if there are people who find out, after they have somebody on staff, it comes to their attention that that person is a homosexual and they are offended by it and they want to remove that person from their employment, no law will prevent it. I A MEMBER: That's right. He'll find a way. MR. C.

MANNESS: There is no law that the socialists opposite will pass that will prevent it because if a person, an employer, feels strongly enough about it, they will do it. There will be a reason, Madam Speaker, and it will not be stated and it will not be proven, and there's no Human Rights Commission in the land that will be able to do anything about it. That person will be removed from that employment. Madam Speaker, why are we passing this law? Why are we doing it? Because if we need prot

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-2-71
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 2nd hansardpdf 71.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ddf5071bbb1524ab54a0a3dc6cc5c6838f3d0687

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