Manitoba Hansard — 23 May 1978 (Sitting 47A, 31st Legislature, 2nd Session)

31-2-47a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Time: 2:30 p.m. LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, May 23, 1978 OPENING PRAYER by Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER, Hon. Harry E. Graham {Birtle-Russell): Before we proceed, I should like to direct the attention of the honourable members to the gallery where we have 60 students from St. Johns High School under the direction of Mr. Rocznick. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Inkster. We also have 40 students from the University of Winnipeg under Jean Pierce Lalonda. These students are actually from Quebec .

We have 32 students from Seneca College in Ontario under the direction of Mrs . Walker . On behalf of all the honourable members , we welcome you here today. PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake . MR. HENRY J. EINARSON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of the Wawanesa and District Memorial Hospital , praying for the passing of

An Act to amend

An Act to incorporate the Wawanesa and District Memorial Hospital. MR. SPEAKER: Reading and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . HON. L. R. {Bud) SHERMAN {Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague , the Honourable the Minister of Education and myself, I would like to table the Report of the Joint Ministerial Task Force on Nursing Education in Manitoba , December , 1977. MR. SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS HON.

EDWARD McGILL, Minister of Consumer Affairs {Brandon West) introduced Bill No. 29, The Commodity Futures Act. SPEAKER'S RULING MR. SPEAKER: Before we proceed with Oral Questions , there was an issue raised the other day by the Member for Lac du Bonnet dealing . with privileges of the House . I listened very carefully to the argument put forward by the Honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet. I also listened very carefully to the remarks of the Honourable Minister of Agriculture . It is my opinion that the privileges of the House were not abrogated. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster MR.

SIDNEY GREEN: Mr. Speaker , I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs . I wonder, Mr . Speaker, whether the Minister is satisfied that the 6 percent increase in the price of retail milk to the consumer has been authorized in such a way that his department is entirely satisfied that the consumer interests have been protected? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker , in our struggle to control the rate of inflation in our province, we are never satisfied with the increases which are required in order to equalize the additional costs that 2461

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 are being experienced in the milk industry. We feel that the Milk Board has weighed all of the evidence put before them in a manner that is reasonable and fair and the conclusion which they have announced means an increase which is difficult to accept but we feel that under the circumstances that decision was made with due consideration of all the facts. MR. SPEAKER: The Honouraole MEMBER FA Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, would the Minister of Consumer Affairs tell us whether he would consider it appropriate for the Department of Consumer Affairs to be present at such hearings in such a way that they and their experts could analyze the material that's being resented on behalf of those seeking the increase, so that the public would be satisfied that it is represented before the board with people as skilled at least as those who are making a case in an attempt to get an increase? MR. McGILL: Mr.

Speaker, in reply to the Member for Inkster , the board itself - we commented earlier in a previous period of questioning on this matter the board itself is constituted in a way that represents consumer as well as producer interests and we feel that there is an opportunity presented and given by that board for consumer groups to present their views.

We are always interested in the activities of that board which is under the supervision of the Minister of Agriculture , as the member knows, but up to this point we have not considered it necessary or indeed a proper step for the Department of Consumer Affairs to be represented or to make representations to the board . MR. GREEN: Mr. Speake r, to the same Miister , a supplementa ry question .

In view of the fact that the presentations that are made by the people seeking the interests are usually presented not only with legal counsel but also with economists and other professional people pursuing the position, would the Minister not consider that it would be appropriate for a consumers group represented by the public representatives rather than self-appointed consumer groups to assure the public that all of the considerations relative to protecting their interests are made known to the boards of this kind which have the authority to deal with a price commodity which is vital and basic to every family in the Province of Manitoba, both wealthy and non-wealth y.

MR. McGILL: Well, Mr. Speaker , the representations that are made by consumer groups , I think, are done very carefully and very efficiently . I think it is not the function of my department to lead that representation and to take a direct and active

part in it. We are interested in the results , and in the way in which these presentations are made , but , Mr. Speaker , in Manitoba , and it's not common to all provinces, there is an opportunity for groups who are intere sted to appear before the board which has the authority and the responibility of determining what increases, if any, will be allowed in the price of such a basic commodity as milk.

And so we feel that we are rather in the lead with respet to the opportunities and the controls that can be improved upon , in the amount of activity and input that can be made to this board by the consumer groups, as it's now being made in Manitoba . MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker , do I take it then that the Minister is saying that he will not consider the massing of public informa tion material to be presented to that board in the same way as is done by the province to the Clean Environment Commission where private people also make representations , but the public lends resources to the board so that it can make its decision? Is he saying that he will not consider such a procedure? MR. McGILL: Well, Mr. Speaker, the same reque st might be made of all of the other boards we have in the province and the representations that are made to them.

Should the government, itself, undertake to lead the representations , and to muster and marshal the facts and the presentations that are made? Mr. Speaker, quite frankly I think it would be inappropriate for the government to adopt that role in the hearings that are to be conducted by government agencies and boards . MR. SPEAKE: gthe Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MR. LLOYD AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker , I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture on the same subject .

Can the Minister confirm that he has now received from the Milk Control Board a recommendation that the government investigate means of insuring adequate supplies of milk for people on low income, expectant mothers , and senior citizens , and does he intend to act upon that recommendation and therefore can we expect that this government will now undertake to develop means for insuring that there is adequate supplies of milk for those who need it and can't afford 2462

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 it? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. HON. JAMES E. DOWNEY (Arthur): Mr. Speaker, yes I can confirm that I have that recommendation from the Milk Control Board . I'm sure that our government is very much aware of the fact that people need good nuitrition, as we are well aware of the fact there are harmful things in life for individuals too.

As far as the investigation of the proposal is concerned, I am sure that, in the coming months, the increase in milk itself would indicate any hardships if there are any developing, that we will be monitoring it and be prepared to listen to any reasonable recommendations. I'm sure as far as the health aspect of it, that we have the Minister of Health who is very capable, and we will be discussing this very matter with him . MR. AXWORTHY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I accept the capability of the Minister of Health , but I'm afraid the Minister of Agriculture didn 't answer the question.

Does he, or his colleagues, the Minister of Consumer Affairs or the Minister of Health, intend to establish a specific group within the government to investigate how the recent increase in milk will effect the ability of those on low incomes , senior citizens, expectant mothers , to acquire that particular basic food? Will they investigate that; will they develop an alternative program to provide for support for those who need it, and can we expect a report in this House in very short order as to how they intend to go about providing that kind of program? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. MR.

DOWNEY: Mr. Chairman , as I indicated , as the people are purchasing milk at the higher price, we will be monitoring the situation and I am sure as time proceeds if we feel there is need, and the government of the time will decide whether there is such a review set up, we will certainly inform the House and proceed with the review if we feel it is necessary. MR. AXWORTHY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the - perhaps the Minister of Health will answer this.

Does he intend to provide a review of the present rates being paid on social assistance so that it would compensate for the increased raise in milk prices for those with families with large numbers of children? Can we expect some improvement or increase in that particular portion of their budget to respond to this major difficulty now being faced by people to get proper milk supplies? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. MR. SHERMAN: Well, the difficulties to which the honourable member alludes, Mr.

Speaker , certainly will have to be taken into account in calculating social allowance rates, social allowance provisions, for different applicants . It's not normal of course to shape the social allowance payments around one commodity unless that one commodity is such a basic one and has gone up in price so substantially that it has an impact on the whole budget. It's certainly worth having a look at; I will certainly undertake to look at the impact the price is having on social allowance payments. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Elood . MR. RUSSELL DOERN: Mr..

Speaker , I wou ld like to direct a question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs. Since there could have been a much higher increase in the per litre price of milk, would the Minister have accepted any price increase recommended by the board? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker, that question is one that is based on a hypothesis . We know what the price increase was; I have responded and I think it would be not the right place or time to respond to a hypothetical greater increase or lesser increase in the price of milk. MR. DOERN: Mr.

Speaker , the Minister appears to believe in Ghandi 's passive resistance. My question next is, would the Minister be prepared to challenge or limit government price increases in a given year, so that examlle - VPUT A CEILING ON A PERCNTAGE INCREASE OR A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF PRICE INCREASES THAT COULD BE IN EFFECT IN ANY GIVEN YEAR. MR. McGILL: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think it would be the proper time to respond when a specific 2463

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 question is put in respect to a specific price in a specific situation , but to give a general answer to that is clearly not possible at this time . MR. DOERN: I would ask the Minister whether he or someone in his government would be prepared to consider some subsidy to consumers as a whole or to a segment of the population to make sure that the price of milk doesn 't become a hardship on people who can ill afford it.$x MR. McGILL: Mr.

Speaker, the question now relates to the nutritional qualities of milk in diets and the effect that will have upon health of those who require milk in quantities, and quite clearly that is a matter for the Department of Health to decide , and if they felt that such deficiencies existed then I'm sure the Department of Health would propose some policy for consideration by this government. MR. SPEAKER3fa The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre . MR. J. R. (Bud) BOYCE: Perhaps the government will consider freezing the minimum wage, Mr. Speaker . I have a question for the Minister of Health.

Can the Minister of Health advise the House as to the circumstances in which an adult was held in the Youth Centre and subsequently did $6,000 damage? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR. SHERMAN: No, I can 't, Mr. Speaker, although I thank the honourable member for having given me notice of that question and I will attempt to provide him with a report on those circumstances as quickly as possible, certainly within the next twenty-four hours . MR. BOYCE: Mr. Speaker , a question to the Minister responsible for the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation.

Can the Minister advise the House as to the circumstances under which a citizen was apparently dead for four or five days in one of the Senior Citizens Homes before he was discovered? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister responsible for Hossing . HON. J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek): Mr. Speaker , I'm waiting for a report from my department regarding that circumstance . It's a very regrettable one .

Certainly it's something that can happen in Senior Citizens Homes as large as the one at 185 Smith where there's over 300 units, but I will certainly be prepared to report to the House the circumstances and certainly if there's any circumstances that were out of line regarding it I will give the information to the House. MR. BOYCE: Well, Mr. Speaker , when the Min ister is looking at the report would he ask the staff to consider whether the possiblity exists that the freeze or cutbacks in staffing that the government has generally issued to all Crown agencies was not a contributing factor in this regard . MR.

JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker , I undertook to report to the House but at this point I know of no freeze or cutback in staff that could be attributed to the unfortunate mishap at Smith Street . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Kildonan . MR. PETER FOX: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I'd like to ask the Minister of LABOUR WHETHER THE Minimum Wage Board has met since October the 14th, and if it hasn't when it shall be convened . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour . HON.

NORMA PRICE (Assiniboia): As I mentioned earlier , a couple of months ago , the people that are the members on the Minimum Wage Board felt that there wasn 't too much for them to discuss when it is a matter of policy of the government , and we are reviewing the situation . MR. FOX: Since the Minister says she's reviewing the situation, would she advise what she is reviewing and what the policy isat the present time? MRS. PRICE: When there has been a policy we will announce it, Sir . MR. FOX: Is the Minister indicating there is no policy in respect to minimum wage?! 2464

, Tuesday, May 23, 1978 MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. The Honourable Member for Kildonan. MR. FOX: The Minister didn't hear me, Mr. Speaker . I asked, is the Minister indicating that there is no policy in respect to minimum wage at the present time? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MRS. PRICE: The situation is under review at the present time . That's about all I can tell you . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland . MR. HARVEY BOSTROM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Renewable Resources regarding the ferry operation and the freighting operation for the communities of Bloodvein and Princess Harbour, particularly their fishing operation . As I understand it , from information from those communities, they still do not know what service will be available to them in this coming year .

I wonder if the Minister could be more specific in relation to answers he's already given to the House with respect to the freight service that will be available to that fish packing station at Princess Harbour which serves both communities , Princess Harbour and Bloodvein . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. KEN MacMASTER (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I'll get an up to date for the Member for Rupertsland and I'll deliver it to him tomorrow. MR. BOSTROM: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker .

I wonder if the Minister could consider giving the communities of Bloodvein and Princess Harbour an opportunity to operate the ferry service in there on their own basis similar to the administration set up for the ferry operation which is serving the community of Matheson Island in which I believe the government makes a grant to the commun ity and it is the community 's responsibility afterward to maintain a service to that community. MR. MacMASTER: Mr. Speaker, I don 't think we've ruled out any particular options as to the running of that particular ferry and providing that service . MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster . MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a question to the Minister of Labour. Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Labour consider a 6 percent increase in the price of milk to be an item which should cause her to have the Minimum Wage Board reconvene and consider the minimum wage? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour . MRS. PRICE: Mr. Speaker , as the Minister of Health mentioned earlier , he is going to be looking into it and we will use that as part of our discussion with considering it. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Labour another question . Does she not consider a 6 percent increase in the price of milk sufficient reason, without consultation with the Minister of Health , to convince her to have the Minimum Wage Board to review the existing minimum wages? MRS. PRICE: As I mentioned before , Mr. Speaker, after the Minister of Health has looked into it, the government will be checking into it and see what the feasibility is and how it relates to it. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker , I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs .

Can the Minister of Consumer Affairs advise me whether the Department of Information Services in his department will be facilitating requests by MLAs for the publication of their speeches and other information which would be useful to the people of the Province of Manitoba? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . MR. McGILL : Mr. Speaker, I believe I understand the Member for Inkster's question to be whether 2465

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 or not the Information Services Branch of the Department of Consumer Affairs would accept an application from an MLA to publish certain views or certain comoents in relation to debates within the HTOUSE. Mr. Speaker, the Information Branch, I believe, does not attempt to comment on debates within this Legislature but merely to act as an arm of government to provide information to the taxpayers about the way in which the funds of the government are being spent and the benefits that allegedly accrue from that control of the taxpayers ' money. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge.

MR. AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Tourism. Can he report to the House whether the provincial parks system was opened this weekend without any hitches or any troubles and that the provincial park system is now fully operative in terms of receiving visitors and guests for the summer period? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tourism. HON. ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): Mr. Speaker, some of the campgrounds, as 1 mentioned previously, were under construction . We are doing some construction work at Falcon Lake with regard to some improvement in electrical hookups .

We had certain areas where we were not charging admission yet such as up at the Paint Lake area and a few of the other areas which will be coming onstream in the beginning of June for July and August . Other than that, I understand from departmental officials that the facilities were very well used and in very many areas we had to turn people away. MR. AXWORTHY: Mr.

Speaker , in view of the government's strong interest in the issue of user fees , could the Minister tell us why it was that several of the admission areas to the provincial parks, particularly those in the Whiteshell , were totally unmanned, no admissions were being charged. Had the government declared a particular holiday for users of parks this weekend that was unannounced or was there just simply a bungling in the department so that there was nobody at the gates to receive visitors at that time? MR. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker, in checking some of the areas where we were charging particular admission, whether it be at Moose Lake, Asessippi and some other areas, we found out that it was costing us more to man those particular stations than we were getting in in revenue. As a result, there are certain parks where we will not be charging park entrance fees. The heavily used park areas, such as Falcon, West Hawk, and other areas, will again be manned and I assure the member there will be people there collecting money for the day use as well as seasonal users. MR. AXWORTHY: Well, a supplementary, Mr. Speaker .

I wonder if the Minister would be kind enough to announce exactly which those arethat people will be allowed free admission and could he also indicate whether in fact the decals that providefor seasonal or monthly passes to the parks are now ready and are being distributed at those areas where there is some manning taking place of the admission gates . Thirdly, would he be able to tell us whether the fact that there was nobody at saveral admission gates to the Whiteshell indicates that the Whiteshell Park is no longer heavily used . MR. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker, first of all let me say that the decals especially to those people having cottage lots in the Whiteshell area will be mailed out along with the request for payment for the lease usage and again the cost of that particular decal has been included as it has been in a number of other years in the cost of the lease. With regard to the several booths not being manned , I would appreciate it if the member would advise me either here or outside the House and I can check into that particular matter .

I know that most of the locations that I was advised would be manned were manned and if there is any further informat ion, I'd be pleased to get it from the member . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burrows. MR. BEN HANUSCHAK: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce . In view of the fact that over a week has transpired since the closing date for the call for tenders for the sale of Morden Fine Foods, could the Minister now dvise the House as to the successful bidder, if we want to call him that? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR. BANMAN: Mr. Speaker, I was advised about a week ago and I understand there were some 2466

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 ads in the paper accordingly that the extension for particular proposals with regards to Morden Fine Foods was extended to the 23rd, which is today, and I haven't got any information from the MDC with regard to that. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, I did have a supplementary question to the Minister of Consumer Affairs but you recognized another member - with regard to Information Services.

I would like to ask the Honourable Minister whether he consider the publication of press conferences in which Ministers extol the virtues of legislation and the benefit of legislation being presented by them is not the publication and the dissemination of pol itical information as distinct from administrative information . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Consumer Affairs . MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker, the Information Services policy is to reflect the positions of government, to give as much information as possible of a factual nature to the people of Manitoba in order that they will be fully informed .

And I might further tell the Member for Inkster that with respect to his earlier question as to whether or not otposition members would have the opportunity to avail themselves of that medium , no change in the present policy of the government in the operation of Information Services is presently contemplated . MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker, to the Honourable Minister , is he aware of any opposition member requesting the services of Information Services as part of some pre-existing policy, because I'm not. MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker, I'm not quite sure that I understand the member's question . Would he place that again?

MR. GREEN: Mr. Speaker , the Minister indicates the policy has not been changed . Is he aware of a pre-existing policy where an MLA made a request for the dissemination of information and the policy was to refuse it? MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker , if the member is referring to a previous request from a member, meaning in past years, I'm not aware of any such request having been made nor of the disposition of that request at the time. MR. GREEN: Mr.

Speaker, can the Minister advise the House why the restraint policy, which has limited increases in budget to a suggested between 3 percent and 4 percent , has not been applied to Public Information Services where the budget for salaries has gone up by more than 20 percent? MR. McGILL: Mr. Speaker , the Member for Inkster is now clearly into a problem that should be brought up under the consideration of the Estimates of the department. I would hope that we would reach that stage relatively soon . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member · for Churchill. MR. JAY COWAN: Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health . Can the Honourable Minister indicate to the House what actions he is taking to ensure the continuation of the Thompson Mental Health Unit? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health . MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. SVPEAKER, THE Thompson Mental Health Unit remains in the same position, in terms of the approach and attitude of the government , that ithas been in in the pap pst.

There are some immediate problems that my department officials and I are looking at; if the honourable member is referring to long-range policy or long-range approachs there is no change and we can certainly examine that in detail on my Estimates . MR. COWAN: Thank you , Mr. Speaker . Will the Minister then undertake to meet with the staff at the Thompson Mental Health Unit and discuss their concerns in regard to a lack of what they perceive to be clear policies , andalso to allay their fears as resulting from their

interpretation of the Task Force Report? - MR. SHERMAN: Well, I certainly would undertake to be in very close communication with them, 2467

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 Mr. Speaker . I can't say that I can meet with them in Thompson during the course of the study of my Estimates . If they have any intention of sending a group or a spokesman down here I will certainly meet with them; failing that I would be happy on my next trip into the north , which I'm looking forward to, to meet with them in Thompson as soon as the Honourable Member for St. Boniface and various of his colleagues decide that they can let me out of my Estimates review. MR. COWAN: A related question, Mr. Speaker .

Can the Minister indicate when the vacacy created many weeks ago by the transfer of the social worker from the community of Lynn Lake will be filled , and if that filling is not perceived to be in the near future will he consider re-opening the Lynn Lake Counselling and Resource Centre to fill the gap created by the transfer of that social worker? MR. SHERMAN: Well, I can't give the honourable member a specif ic date on that , Mr. Speaker . I wonder if we could examine that in more depth and detail during my Estimates process?

There is no specific date I can give him at this juncture ; I would appreciate his views on the situation in Lynn Lake vis-a-vis the Lynn Lake Counselling Centre; there was a rationale for making the change that was made which appeared to be justifiable . If the Honourable Member for Churchill feels it isn't justifiable , or there are other perspectives that should be brough t to bear , I would certainly like to discuss that with him in the Estimates process . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Vital. MR. D. JAMES WALDING: Thank you, Mr.

Speaker , my question is for the Honourable Minister of Tourism and Recreation . It refers to the decals that are sent out to those people having cottages in provincial parks , insomuch as in previous years the decals had been sent out about a month before the opening of the season , can the Minister explain what the delay has been this year? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tour ism. MR. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker , the matter of getting the decals out was delayed to a certain extent because of the adjustment of the fees; they had to be gazetted and there was a little bit of a delay and I think most of the people that were out at their cottages were made aware of that and that the bills will be coming out very shortly; hopefully this week . MR. WALDING: A supplementary question , Mr. Speaker . Can the Minister inform the House whether there will be increases in the leases this year , and if so, by how much? MR. BANMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker , the

schedule that has been released , there is an order-in-council that was passed. It varies from whether you're front tier lot or back tier lot and I could supply the member with that particular information. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon East. MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to address a question to the Minister without Portfolio responsible for Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation . Is it the intention of Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation to sell 40 acres of land in the city of Brandon known as the Williamson property? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister respons ible for Housing . MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker , the Member for Brandon East has asked me a couple of times regarding the Manitoba Housing Renewal Corporat ion land in Brandon . The Housing Corporation and the board of the Housing Corporation have been looki ng at all of the land that is owned by the corporation. The Brandon property that he is speaking of is under consideration ; I have not got a recommendation from them as yet but I know it's being studied . MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary .

Given the objectives of land banking, which I believe the Honourable Minister is familiar with , can the Minister advise what is the reason for looking at the question of disposing of such property in the city of Brandon? MR. JOHNSTON: Mr. Speaker , the objection of land banking is far different on this side of the House than it is on the other side of the House, I assure you. The property that the honourable member is speaking of will have houses on it. Now, further than that , whether they 're built by house 2468

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 builders ; whether they're built by government or whether they're built by who, they will have houses on it. MR. EVANS: But Mr. Speaker , I'd like to get a clarification from the Honourable Minister . I'm sure at some time there may be houses on property that exists within a city boundary, but is the Minister telling us that it is likely that this land will be disposed of by Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation and that therefore MHRC will have no influence , for example, on trying to alleviate the accelerating prices of new housing in that city? OMR.

JOHNSTON: I've explained to the Minister before that MHRC has never had any influence on holding prices down as far as housing in Manitoba , and I know the Member for Seven Oaks will probably disagree with me on that. I have offered to give him an answer very soon on one $ieee of property on his constituency . Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member chooses to place his words like , is the Minister , or is the Corporation "likely" to do something by putting words in my mouth, I don't intend to answer it that way. He will have a report on what will happen to that land when it's decided by MHRC. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Burrows . MR. HANUSCHAK: Mr. Speaker , I wish to direct my question to the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce . Did he apply the same principles of business sense and business management to Morden Fine Foods as he did to the Lord Selk irk, that is to say, did he as he did in the case of the Lord Selkirk cancel the bookings ; did he similarly cancel orders for the purchaseof vegetables by MordenFine Foods for the producers and orders for thesale of the canned products to whoever the purchasers maybe? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry . MR. BANMAN: Mr.

Speaker , I appreciate that question because I would like to tell the members that the Once Upon a Time products that are being manufactured by Morden Fine Foods are still available for sale and hopefully willcontinue to be once we find a suitable buyer. But in the meantime, Mr. Speaker, the company is continuing. They have contracted for this year 's growingseason and will be canning their fine products again in the months to come. ORDERS OF THE DAY ORDER FOR RETURN ORDER NO. 56: On Motion of Mr. Fox. THAT an Order of the House do issue for a return showing the following information : 1.

Since October 24, 1977 to May 17, 1978 how many trips have been made on official government of Manitoba business by Ministers ; Deputy Min isters ; and Assistant Deputy Ministers out of province and overnight or extended trips within the province broken down by departments , 2. The names of accompanying individualson each trip made . 3. The destination of each trip. 4. The nature of the official business of each trip. 5. The total cost of travelling for each trip. 6. The other expenses relating to eachtrip. MR. SPEAKERG The Honourable Minister of Finance . HON. DONALD W. CRAIK(Riel): We accept the order, Mr.

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Governmen t House Leader . MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Speaker, I move , seconded by the Minister of Highways that Mr . Speaker . do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty . MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, with the Honourable Member for Radisson in the Chair for the Department of Health and Social Development and the Honourable Member for Crescentwood in the Chair for the Department of Executive Council.

CONCURRENT COMMITTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MR. CHAIRMAN, Mr. Warren Steen: Committee come to order. We have a quorum now. Some 2469

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 were mentioning prior to the commencement of the Committee , did I still have my list from last week - I do , and the list reads as follows : the Member for St. Johns followed by the Members for Burrows , St. Vital, Inkster and the Minister of Finance . That's the way it was left at 5.00 p.m. on Thursday and then we sat Thursday evening and then Committee rose almost moments after sitting . The Member for St. Johns is first . MR. SAUL CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, I guess I'm continuing from where I left off at 5.30 on Thursday afternoon .

I was speaking and we adjourned at 5:30 in order for me to resume at 8:00. I want to draw to your attention firstly that at 8:00 o'clock - we didn 't meet at 8:00 o'clock, the Committee was late in forming a quorum . But for some peculiar reason , although the record doesn 't show that, the Minister of Finance spoke and moved a motion . According to the record he wasn't even recognized , but the record shows that he spoke. You , Mr.

Chairman , indicated the same order of speakers as you 've jst indicated now, but the Minister of Finance is r ecorded to have spoken so, if you take that in a sense of criticism of your chairmanship , I guess you may be right in assuming that , but I wonder that the Minister of Finance could speak when indeed I was still in full flight of my oratory.

Secondly - I'm glad the Minister of Finance has come in - I think he ought to know , he's been around this Legislature for quite a long time , that no one really has a right to just walk in and say, "We are not meeting ." There are two ways I know of that a legislative Committee does not meet: one is by agreement - by the courtesy of the House Leaders talking to each other and agreeing, for whatever reason , that a Committee will not meet or will not continue to meet, and the other way is to have the Committee meet and then , if there is a reason and it doesn 't even have to be a good one , if there is a reason for the Committee to cease meeting then the motion to rise is an order .

But for someone, even though he is the acting Premier , to walk into one Committee and announce that because of a conflict in Committee meetings which wasn 't really true ' only one Committee will sit is a little bit arrogant, Mr. Chairman . I think it would have been a matter of common courtesy to either clear it in advance , or clear it at the time , as is often done between House Leaders , or to come into the Committee which was destined to sit and tell them , rather than leaving members in this room just sitting and twiddling their thumbs which was the situation . Mr.

Chairman, this is not terribly serious but I think that the acting Premier should know that when there's a Committee of the Legislature due to meet he doesn 't control its operations except by the weight of the majority which he swings . He then came in and did it the correct way - one of the two correc ways. MR. CRAIK: Are you arguing on a point of orde r, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: No, not really . Not really. For the benef it of the members of the Committee I read off the five names of persons that I had listed from Thursday afternoon last. The Member for St.

Johns was first and he's just addressing the Committee in that manner, not on a point of privilege or order or anything. MR. CRAIK: Well, I think it does become a point of order then, Mr. Chairman , because of the nature of . .. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman , I did not raise a point of order . MR. CRAIK: No, well , I'm raising a point of order then because it becomes a point of order when it's raised . .. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Finance on a point of order . MR. CRAIK: . . . in that manner . I think Mr. Cherniack realizes that a motion to adjourn is in order at any time and that is what transpired .

It was commented on in the Main Chamber prior to coming into this Chamber and then it was followed up by coming into this Chamber and of course doing it formally . I realize that Mr. Cherniack and some members that are on this committee were not in the Main Chamber and probably had come directly here . It was the intent to do it whichever wasthe proper way, and having done it both ways I thought we had covered off properly as the situation existed .

I'm sure that you will find that in the past many motions to rise have been placed at the discretion of the Government House Leader or whoever the person was that decided to do it in the days of the former government as well , so I don 't want to let the matter go by without raising a point of order that a motion to rise is in order at any time and that's exactly what took place . MR. CHAIRMAN: Well , if I can , as Chairman , comment to the members of the committee , I accept 2470

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 the Member for St. Johns as constructive criticism but the Minister of Finance put a motion that the committee rise . I was instructed by the Clerk that it's a non-debatable motion and therefore we called for the numbers on the vote and the vote carried so the committee rose . As the Membe r for St. Johns has said , I have in the past tried to follow my listing of speakers as they are written down, as 1 write them down , and try to follow it most times but the Minister of Finance did interject the other evening with a non-debatable motion and I did recognize him. The Member for St. Johns.

MR. CHERNIACC: Mr. Chairman , I stand to be corrected and really I do stand to be corrected, 1 was under the impression that a motion to adjourn is in order at any time but not so as to interrupt the speaker and, you know, when I had the floor , and that's the only point I make. I don't question firstly , that a motion to adjourn is in order at any time; secondly , that it's not debatable. I don't question that. But I stand to be corrected in my impression that you cannot interrupt a speaker with a motion to adjourn. That was really the point I made. The fact is that Mr.

Craik would have had no problem, really no problem , had he spoken to the House Leader or to anyone else on our side in advance and said , " Hey fellows, we goofed ; we made a mistake and le're sorry but we don' t want to go on." I think there would not have been a problem . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister of Finance. MR. CRAIK: I repeat, Mr. Chairman bfore we came in here. MR. CHERNIACK: Well , Mr. Chairma n, it was done not saying , "Hey, we goofed . Is it okay if we don 't go ahead? " - but rather a decision was made that we are not proceeding because of a mix-up in committees .

I still say there was no mix-up in committees ; there was a mix-up in the planning of the government as far as holding a Cabinet meeting is concerned, and I assume it was urgent and necessary and I've no objection, Mr. Chairman . I'm not walking out for any reason other than that apparently I have an appo intmen t for which someone has come to see me. - MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Burrows is the next speaker on the list . The Member for St. Vital on a point of order. MR. WALDING: Mr.

Chairman, one evening last week when we adjourned, it had been brough t to your attention, Citation 242 of Beauchesne dealing with an amendment or a motion that you had accepted that evening . As I recall, when we adjourned you had taken it under advisement . I would ask you if you have had time to consider it and if you have anything to announce to us at this time? MR. CHAIRMAN: No, I haven't , to the Member for St. Vital, at this time. The Membet · for Burrows. MR. HANUSCHAK: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman .

During the meetings that the Committee of Supply has had dealing with the salary of the Minister without Portfolio responsible for the Task Force on Government Re-Organization and Economy, we have heard the Minister state that the Task Force is quite at liberty to state its impressions, observations , as perce ived by it, and if anyone disagrees with the Task Force , well , they re quite free to disprove the statements, the allegations , conclusions , formulated by the Task Force .

I suppose I can perhaps appreciate that a bit more today than I did last week after hearing a colleague of his, the Minister of Tourism , Recreation and Cultural Affairs , make a similar comment in the House that on the basis of whatever - he had made certain assumptions about the performance of the previous government or one of its Ministers. Anyway , that's the position of this Minister , these are our conclusions ; anybody disagrees , disprove them ; prove that they 're wrong . And all throughout the debate , Mr.

Chairman , in this Committee , and comments made by the Minister outside the House, we've heard him talk about lack of control by the previous government , stating that the Ministers had no knowledge of the financial position of their department as they proceeded through each fiscal year . There was a lack of direction; waste, leakage, mismanagement , and so forth .

And we heard comment made that somehow or another the Task Force , or somebody on the Task Force - perhaps the co-chairman, this co-chairman of the Task Force T had discovered that the Premier had taken one week to review the Estimates of all the departments of government and on that basis -(Interjection)- yes, on that basis gave his approval to the Estimates of Expenditure for that particular fiscal year. Well , Mr. Chairman, you know, as well as all of us know , that the Minister really had brought 2471

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 no evidence to back up those charges that he made. In fact, Mr. Chairman, those charges and others of a similar kind have at this point in time been proven false by his own colleagues.

So really, if he's looking to us to disprove his charges, they have already been disproven by his own colleagues, certainly in the departments of which the Estimates have already been considered by the Committee of Supply , because every Minister had been sked whether he had, upon assuming office, whether he had discovered, identified any waste, lack of control, leakage , mismangement, and the answer was in the negative from every Minister .

We've completed approximately half, perhaps a bit over half the departments, so by that number of Ministers, which likely at this point in time is a majority of them , comments of this kind made by the Minister without Portfolio whose salary we're now debating, they have been disproven.

So by this Minister 's own rules , the ball is back in his court so he ought to, if he were to read Hansard he will find that many of the charges and accusations that he's made have been disproven by his own colleagues and if he still feels that he's right , then, as I've said a moment ago, the ball is back in his court and he will have to come up with some stronger evidence - I shouldn 't say stronger evidence because he's come up with none at all. He'll have to come up with some evidence to back up the statements that he's made. Mr.

Chairman, during the debate of the Minister 's salary we may have lost track of the fact that he was not the chairman of the Task Force but he was one of the two co-chairmen of the Task Force. I don't really know what the division of responsibility was, if there was any division of responsibility, between the two co-chairmen. Were they jointly and severally responsible for the entire operations of the Task Force or was there some division of responsibility that Mr.

Riley from the private sector was responsible for certain areas of activity and the member of Cabinet and the member of the Legislature being the other co-chairman responsible for some other area of activity. That, Mr. Chairman, we don 't know and perhaps the Minister ought to comment on that. I think today it's even more important that he do so than it may have been before, particular ly in the light of the interview with Mr. Riley, it was published in one of the daily newspapers last Saturday.

My impression on reading this story - this is my impression, I think that I have just as much right to state my impressions of a newspaper publication as the Task Force has to state its impressions of the operation of government, my impression of the newspaper story was that Mr. Riley was called in to head up the Task Force, to make his recommendations, whatever recommendations he chose to make, but maintain a low profile, and that the elected member was appointed to co-chair the Task Force, the Minister without Portfolio , that he take the political criticism for it and not Mr. Riley.

I can assure the Honourable Minister that all that there will be will be criticism because there won't be any praise. Up to this point in time, what have we heard the Ministers of line departments say? Most of the Ministers at some point or another during the consideration of their Estimates have indicated that, well there is evidence that some of the recommendations made by the Task Force have already been implemented or are on their way to implementation by the line departments. So, therefore, what's the purpose of a Task Force, that's already been done . Some Ministers have indicated, Mr.

Chairman, that other recommendations are unlikely to be implemented by the Ministers at any time so therefore it's quite unlikely, Mr. Chairman , that the Minister will come out of this exercise a hero, as an architect of a more efficient and a more effecti vemodus operandi for government. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I would suspect that when the day comes in his Cabinet or in his leader's Cabinet that it will come to a parting of ways.

The situation could conceivably come about that his leader will say to him, look, you recommended nothing new because much of what you had recommended my other Ministers have already commenced implementation prior to the make of the recommendations. You attempted to take credit for what the Ministers are already doing and any new recommendations that you made, Mr. Chairman , he will say the administrators of the line departments aren't accepting them anyway. So, on that point, they could conceivably, and qite likely,

part company. 1 suppose originally quite a different scenario was envisaged . I would suspect that it was originally intended that the Task Force exercise contribute tow ard or lead toward a reduction in the Civil Service and that the Minister will be the hatchetman to do that job , that he will take the blame for it. But that, Mr. Chairman , hasn't happened because the Civil Service has not been reduced all that much.

There has been some reorganization, reclassification, but I doubt very much whether by the time the end of the fiscal year rolls around that we will see the type of reduction in Civil Service that the Minister talks about now. In some areas where there has been a reduction in the Civil Service it's the Ministers of the line departments that were held accountable for it and they have to take the flack for it and not the Minister responsible for the Task Force. So, therefore, 2472 .'

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 Mr. Chairman, I think that the title ascribed to this exercise by my colleague , the Member for Inkster, is quite correct that this is nothing more than a task farce . Again, Mr. Chairman, I must state for the record that there was no evidence in the report on which the conclusions and the recommendations contained therein are based , no appendix indicating the data that the Task Force had accumulated and said, "Well, here's the state of affairs as we found them , and on the basis of this, these are the recommendations that we're making. " An example I can give you of that, Mr.

Chairman , is in, I think it's in Volume II of the Task Force - and I would not want you to rule me out of order, I don't want to debate this at this time , I'm merely giving this as an example - there's a statement made to the effect that the financing of public school education is chaotic. Well, Mr. Chairman , we note that the present Minister of Education is continuing basically , essentially the same formulae for the funding of education . He may have beefed them up to cope with inflation; he may have introduced some slight variations but basically and essentially the same basic formulae are continued.

So, Mr. Chairman, it would seem to me that if in fact the government believed what one of its Ministers said in his report , or which he claims to be his report, that the financing of public school education is chaotic, that surely that would be one of the first things that this government would want to correct and say, "Well, these are the formulae that were previsouly in effect. We're scrapping those and we're establishing new ones ." Secondly, Mr. Chairman, there was no attempt at any overall integrated or interrelated review of government programs and of government operations .

For example , I really wonder , Mr. Chairman, whether in reviewing the education program, the review teams consulted with Northern Affairs because, after all, whatever is done in the education program, in the education departments , certainly would be of concern and interest to what is happening in the Department of Northern Affairs . I doubt very much whether the education review team consulted with the review team doing a review of the agricultural programs . You know, it made a recommendation that the future of Assiniboine Community College be closely examined . Well , Assiniboine Community College, Mr.

Chairman, as you probably now , offers a number of agricultural programs . Now surely one would think that the education review team would want to obtain the views of the agricultural review team on that particular point at least or with Tourism, Industry and Commerce and so forth . I don't think that that type of dialogue took place. MR. SPIVAK: You don't know, though , you don't know. MR. HANUSCHAK: We don't know. MR. SPIVAK: No, but you don't think . MR. HANUSCHAK: I don't think and I assume that it doesn 't. MR. SPIVAK: Oh, I see. MR. HANUSCHAK: I assume that it doesn't. MR. SPIVAK: Okay. MR.

HANUSCHAK: I'll indicate again, Mr. Chairman, in fact, I will come in a minute or two to something that is, I think, a bit more conclusive than an assumption. I would think, Mr. Chairman, that each review chairman went into his corner, did his job, didn't compare notes with anyone and, as I've said, the Minister interjected by saying that I don't know whether this in fact happened or didn't happen or I don 't think that it happened or didn't happen. Well , Mr. Chairman, you will recall that some time ago , during one of the debates in the House, I read into the record a letter which I had received from Mr.

Runciman who headed the Agricuture · review team in which he admitted that at no time had he any consultation with, or met with, Mr. Fulcher who chaired the Education review team. That was by his own admission , Mr. Chairman, that's not just merely my assumption as the Minister goes upon . The Minister wasn't in the Cabinet room at any time while we were government but somehow he was able to formulate an assumption that the premier took one week to review the Estimates, but this is not an assumption, Mr.

Chairman, I'm making this statement on the basis of a letter to which I had referred and which was tabled in the House, which I had received from the chairman of the Agriculture review team. Then , Mr. Chairman , as further evidence of the unlikelihood of that type of dialogue having taken 2473

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 place, at a key point in time , approaching the middle of March, about the 10th of March , at which time I would have thought that the review teams' recommendations would be in their final stages of tidying up and pulling together loose ends for presentation to the Minister co-responsible for the Task Force , that the chairmen of the review teams would have been very much involved .

Lo and behold, I have discovered that three of the chairmen of the review teams were out of the province at a key point in time, the beginning of March throughout the practically the balance of the month of March - Mr. Benham until about the 21st of March was out of the province ; Mr. Jones until the end of March ; - I'm sorry, I don 't have the name of the chairman before me - it's the president of one of the insurance companies , Monarch Life; and Mr. Runciman was away in Geneva until early April, at that key point in time , Mr. Chairman .

So there were no review committee chairmen to hold that type of dialogue amongst themselves . The third point , Mr. Chairman , in addition to there not being any overall integrated or interrelated review, there was no consultation with the consumers of the programs and there again, Mr. Chairman, we know that. It's not that I think that or that some of the members of this committee think that , but we know that, that was the main complaint made by the Manitoba Teachers ' Society about th Task Force Report, that there was no consultation with them . Mr.

Chairman , I would suggest to you that there was no consultation with the teachers, or the trustees , nor people in the north, nor the farmers, nor the hospitals , nor with anyone . Of course, the Minister uses as an excuse that, well, they were pressed for time, the shortness of time, they wanted to report back as quickly as possible, the Task Force was established in mid-November , or thereabouts, and they wanted to come back with a report as quickly as possible. Well , Mr. Chairman , I would suggest to you that either you do a job properly or you don't do it at all. You know, Mr.

Chairman , there 's the future of a million people at stake here that can be affected by whatever is contained within the Task Force Report, so simply rushing through the whole thing in the manner in which the Task Force did once again demonstrates the disregard of this government for the welfare of the people of Manitoba . Everything was done on the basis of an immediate cost-benefit analysis . If whatever is being done today , if it can be demonstrated that it is to your advantage rather than to the government's advantage from a financial point of view today, fine, that 's what we do.

But no long-range view of programs , programs that may be somewhat more costly today but they may pay dividends over a period of 5 years , 10 years , over 20 years, that type of thing was disregarded. Either they've got to pay their own way today or else they 're scrapped . So, Mr. Chairman , it indicates that the rcommendations that were brought in of whatever kind, that there was one main overriding object ive to them and that is the concern of this Minister of the government about theirown political survival at whatever cost , at whatever cost to the people of the province .

Never mind the long-range implications of programs . If it should appear that the program would generate some appeal , some attrac tion to the public over the next while , hopefully until the next election , that's what will be recommended regardless of whether it's good or bad for the people but as long as in their opinion they would hope that it will get them re-elected to government. My last concern, Mr. Chairman , and this is something that I would want to give you , as Chairman , notice of at this particular time because I'm not quite sure how we wou ld handle it. It may be, Mr.

Chairman, that some member of the committee may want to mov a motion that this Minister's salary be reduced to $1 .00 and you will note , Mr. Chairman , in the Estimates that there is only one line for tte salaries of the three Ministers without Portfolio showing 3 x 15.6 whatever that comes to - $46,800.00. And that line in the Estimates ' Book doesn 't give us an opportunity to identify any of the three Ministers individually.

Now, I suppose , one could move a motion that the salaries of the Ministers without Portfolio be reduced to $33,201 aed hopefully that whoever signs the check cheque will pay the $15,600 apiece to the other two Ministers and reduce this Minister's salary to $1.00 but unfortunately I don 't sign the cheques and the rest of us over here, many of us hzre, don't sign the cheques . MR. SPIVAK: Not unfortunately , fortunately . MR.

HANUSCHAK: Now, it may be that whoever signs the cheques may choose to pay this Minister's full indemnity of $15,600 and reduce the salary of one of his colleagues Ministers without Portfolio to $1 .00 and I wouldn't want to see that happen, Mr. Chairman . So it would seem that the only alternative that we may have is that the three Ministers without Portfolio may have to stand or fall as a group and reduce the salaries of all of them to $1.00 and then that problem that I've indicated 2474

Tuesday , May 23, 1978 a moment ago will not arise . Then they all stand or tall, either all receive their full indemnity or have their salaries reduced. This, I would not want to see happen because, well , insofar as the ... Well , no, 1 don 't know, because it may be that when we come to deal with the salary of the Minister responsible tor MHRC, we may also want to reduce his salary to $1 .00, so that will make it two. The House Leader , I can think of no reason at the moment why I would want to reduce his salary to $1 .00 so it will still leave that problem with us.

But , nevertheless, 1 think that the simp lest way may be that the three of them stand or tall as a group . Thank you , Mr. Chairman. MR. SPIVAK: You've got a problem there . MR. CHAIRMAN: I guess , to the Member tor Burrows, I'll have to handle that one when it's presented to me. MR. HANUSCHAK: That's right. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member tor St. Vital is next on the list. MR. WALDING: Thank you , Mr. Chairman . I had one comment or question on

Chapter IV. If any of the members of the committee wish to deal with Chapters I to Ill , I will defer until we get to that. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the Member for St. Vital , we're discussing the Minister 's salary and so we're ,/ just discussing the report in gene ral and no one has given me, from the committee , direction as to whether they were wanting to go in general terms or page by page so I've assumed from the outset that we are discussing his salary and any pertinent parts of the report that you or othe r members wish to discuss . We're sort of discussingit in general terms . The Member tor Selkirk . MR.

HOWARD PAWLEY: Mr. Chairman, a point of order . I'm wondering if it would be wise to attempt to at least clear up any questions that there might be on the early part of the report , at least in Volume I before proceeding into Volume II if we shouldn 't have some sequence of movement. MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I'm the servant of the committee , so .. . MR. SPIVAK: On the point of order , Mr. Chairman, I want to make it very clear that there was never any, and there 's been some misunderstanding of this because of the press reports ... This report is not here tor adoption by the committee .

This report is related to the work that I've done in which my salary is open to question . This report can be discussed in relation to salary in whatever form the members in the opposition and the members of the government want to , and that's all. It's not a page by page or

chapter by chapte r item and we should make it clear so that there should be no problem with that . MR. PAWLEY: Yes, that 's right, no problem . Well , Mr. Chairman , certainly there 's noth ing to make clear because certa inly we understand that to be the case. I'm just wondering , in order to assist you , if it would not be better that we deal in some orderly fashion rather than skipping from front to back and then from back to front. That was the only purpose of my suggestion . MR.

CHAIRMAN: How we deal with the report is really up to the committee at large as to which way they feel is the most favou rable way of doing it. To date we have been dealing with it in very general terms because the real thing in quest ion is the passage of a Minister 's salary rather than the adoption of a report but the Minister happens to be responsible to a degree tor this report so the refore that's the item that you can discuss the report in is under his salary . The Member for St. Vital. MR. WALDING: Well, to the same point , Mr. Chairman . I wanted to deal with one spec ific page in

Chapter IV and if members were still discussing the generality or the introduction background or methodology in the first three chapters , I would defer to them. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the Member for St . Vital, I have no objection when a speaker is recognized , that he can deal with any aspect of the report h wishes with the Minister responsible . MR. WALDING: Very well then , Mr . Chairman , I'll refer the Minister to Page 19 of the 2475

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 first part of the report where there is a graph. Graph Ill is listed and 1 note that there is no vertical scale to the graph which makes it practically meaningless. It shows the two lines ascending at approximately 45 degrees . Since there is no scale there it becomes meaningless . Whatever scale is proposed or suggested can show the graph ascending at any rate whatsoever, which seems a pretty sloppy, a misleading graph to presumably make a particular point to people .

It says at the bottom that the source is Tables 1 and 2, and I suppose by reading the text that maybe something could be inferred as to what the graph in fact refers to . However , more seriously than that , it says at the top , the heading for the graph, as Gross Provincial Product and Manitoba Provincial Government Expenditures. And referring back to the graph, Graph No. II shows the total expenditures ; Graph I shows the tota l expenditures as a share of GrossNational Product , Gross Provincial Product. So I'm really not sure how Graph Ill, which shows Gross Provincial Product, is derived from Graph I .

What the graph would show , Mr. Chairman, to anyone just looking at it and taking the heading as being truthful and accurate, it would show that back in 1967 Manitoba Government Expenditures were equal to the Gross Provincial Product, and since that time that government expenditures have been rising at a rate faster and in excess of Gross Provincial Product. Now , that is patently false and misleading , Mr. Chairman.

I suspect, well , it's obvious that the two were not equal at 1967, and if the people who had drafted this really wanted to show those two in relation to each other, they would certainly have shown those two lines on that graph as being separated by a very large amount. To look at Graph Ill and find how misleading it is, and it's so sloppy as not to have a vertical scale on it, really makes me doubt the accuracy of anything else that I would see in here.

I would like to hear from the Minister just what the explana tion of this is and whether it was meant to be misleading or whether there is some error , or just . simple sloppiness in it. MR. CHAIRMAN: The list that I initially started with had two more speakers that I have indicated earlier that wished to speak and neither of them are present ; that's the Member for Inkster and the Minister of Finance . Is there anyone else that wishes to go? The Member for Elmwood. MR. DOERN: I had a few points that I wanted to question the Minister on.

Again , on the notion of zero-base budgeting ,this to me is sort of a trendy concept that the Minister is promoting and we know that he likes to be with it and to present us with the latest techniques of management, but I am wondering how useful this really is. I wanted to ask the Minister if he could explain how this would work in fact rather than in theory. Let us say, for example , that the Department of Education was appearing at Estimates time in the Cabinet room to make its case.

I gather , if I read the report correctly and I read the press releases built around the Task Force , that the Minister would expect the Minister of Education to come in with his senior staff and argue from square one on the need for funds and the need for staff , so that we would find ourselves in the ridiculous situation of the Minister of Education, for example, arguing on the need for an elementary education system . So it strikes me, Mr.

Chairman , that one of two things would happen , that you either get the ridiculous situation of every Minister trying to justify his very reason for existence - like , in this case, the Minister of Education saying " There shall be, should be, would be desirable if there was an elementary education system ," and then thi nking of arguments to back that up. Now then we would go to the following year, and I'm just wondering in the second year whether the Minister would require new and forceful arguments , or whether he would accept photostated copies of last year 's submissions.

In other words , how would it wor k in application? Do you just simply have people coming, thinking of novel arguments to justify a program that 's been in existence for a hundred years , or do you have a staff coming in and throwing down huge quantities of photostated material saying, "Well, this is what we said before , and really there's nothing to add, so if you'd read the material, or if you would access your files from last year you would see why ,raison d 'etre of this particular program ." So I'm asking the Minister, how would this work in fact?

It strikes me as great in theory , if it's great in theory, but in practical application , ridiculous . MR. CHAIRMAN: The Minister responsible for the Task Force . MR. SPIVAK: Mr.

Chairman, I think that's a valid question and one that should be discussed , but one has to understnd , in the perspective of the approach of the Task Force dealing with the whole question of government control and the management information system , the basic thesis that managers should be given clear responsibility for carrying out their tasks - and I refer to Page 39, " Managers be given authority over the resources necessary to accomplish the task ; A fair and 2476

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 equitable method of evaluating task performance should be established and used to assess management performance; that Managers be held accountable by their superiors ." Now, that's on Page 39 . Now , I've indicated that there is a need for a management information system which will deal both with financial accountability and program accountability , and we have indicated on Page 43 with respect to the report that Manitoba should move towards a system of financial control which has come to be known as zero-base budgeting.

And this is something that must be individually designed for the government; it must be conceived in co-operation with the various managers of the departments and with those who have been involved to a large extent in the auditing of programs, and it must be accompanied by a training program within the government. And that 's why something cannot be just introduced just as a matter of practice , nor can you substitute one thing for the other . The traditional systems of accounting are based on legal requirements rather than the information which managers need.

The traditional systems do not provide bases for evaluating discretionary overheads, advertis ing, research , accounting , office administrat ion. Where the benefit is worth the cost , in which there is really a requirement for a performance yardstick , I have to go back to the basic theory of government. We are not an employment agency ; we are here to service the people ; we are not an agency which is supposed to simply buy supplies from those who produce supplies in the province.

Our purpose is to serve the people in those programs which are necessary for governm3nt, in those situations where those who are in need require our assistance . And the measure of what we do has to be based on our ability to perform , and those performance yardsticks have to be established and they have to be established in a way that there can be a continual monitoring .

There is a requirement annually, for those who are the managers , once the authority has been given and once the information systems are set up, to be able to come ck , as they have to come back, and deal with their budgets and start from zero , start basically right from the beginning and go through it to be able to prove that the targeted group of people whom they were supposed to deal with had in fact been met ; that the programs had met the budgetary requirements of the previous years, or if they didn't , the reasons why they didn't; that they in turn are able to justify the inputs of the dollars that are required against the measurement of the outputs of the services that have in fact been provided.

Now, the traditional : systems are unsatisfactory in assessing non-capitalized development costs, Research and development and program development and this is also very much a part of it. We have to have, as I say, the value of all the expenses against a yardstick so that when you go through the transitional period of going to zero-base budgeting which is really what you 're talking about , how we will do it if we proceed with this .

What we're really talking about if this is accepted is a transitional period in which there is both training and a requirement for the development of the yardsticks that are necessary and for the development of the management information system which is basic as to whether you can continue on with a zero-base program . ,1 I suggest to you that that managemen t information system is basic to government being able to operate in the future .

There is no way in which gvernments are going to be able to realize the amount of moneys from the public just by general increase in taxes without indicating in a very direct manner that they are efficient in what they are doing, that they know what they 're doing and they have the capacity to make the relevant decisions based on correct information . The Honourable Member for Winnipeg Centre is not here and he is correct when I said valid information, it's correct information on which you make valid deductions and valid conclusions and that's what has to be done .

Correct information upon which valid conclusions are made. The whole object of zero-base budgeting is to identify the minimum level of service which is necessary to achieve whatever the purpose is.

Now , once you go through that transitional period , you hopefully will be able to suggest that because you have to employ analysis techniques to provide for the decision makers the opportunity for knowing what the minimum levels of service are and for being able to recognize and determine the priorized package of options that can be available because those options have to be understood, they have to be clearly identified and they have to be quantified to be able to be understood in terms of the approach that 's being made .

The following year when the person comes back and starts from base zero on the program , they're in a position to be able to make an assessment on the basis of the quantifications that were indicated and in effect on the moni toring of the program through the information services and the determination of the targeted group who are supposed to be serviced and whether they have been serviced and whether the costs reated to this are correct or not and the discretionary costs that are referred to have in fact been applied correctly . Because, Mr.

Chairman, I think I can say this, that there are many programs of government in which the dollars involved and the people who are targeted 2477

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 to be received have an administrative cost and have less numbers of people than other significant programs which have less money that is put out with a smaller targeted group but, for some reason or other , the bureaucracy itself has built up and all the things that are attendant with it.

The managers, in assembling the decision packages, have to address questions such as the consequences of eliminating particular programs and the means by which objectives may be achieved at less cost because that is the motive, to be able to try and achieve the objectives at less cost, again coming back to the objective of government. The package must be developed with various levels of funding and with performance measures already formulated and then after the years of experience, you have the basis on which decisions have to be made.

The individual increments that are prepared in each package by the various managers who, again, as I've told you, have now been given the authority once the budget is approved to manage without having to go back for the complete procedure of the checks and balances that now exist within the system. Once that has been done , they have to, in their preparation for the following year, be able to have the priorization of their increments based on several possibilities, one of which there may be no more money; there may be less money or there may be more money.

That will really be dependendent on the economic conditions , the revenue conditions and on the realities of the time . Again , zero-base budgeting must be individually designed fo the government. It will have to be dealt with in co-operation with all the managers in the government itself and it has to be accompanied by a training program as I suggested .

It would mean those who are responsible would come in with their program, would be able to produce that information, that information would be quantified, the targeted group would be set, there would be an information system that would present information to the treasury comm ittee on a monthly and on a quarterly basis, and on a yearly basis , which would indicate whether in fact in a financial and program accountability way, they have in fact been met , at which point the assessment then could be very easily made that the program is capable of being continued or must be modified as a result of the information that one has.

If, during the course of the year, the revenue picture changes and there is either less money or more money , the government of the day will know where to put that money if they have more money ; they will know where to stop expenditure of money if they have less money . So therefore in budgeting for the next year , based on the anticipated revenues there will be a basis on which to make judgments .

Programs which cannot support the rigorous tests that will be required would not be continued on the basis that either there is something lacking, either the financial information isn't correct, the targeted group haven 't been reached, an alteration is taking place on the assumptions that were responsible for that program or possibly those who have been responsible for managing it, have not managed it as capably as they could . So for that reason there will be an alteration in program and in some cases a discontinuation .

I think that governments have to put themselves through this test as business has to be put through the test.

So, although zero-base budgeting is a terminology like sunset provisions are terminologies which become sort of the jargon of those who are in the consulting field at this particular time, from a point of view of the government of this size dealing as it has to in the priorization of decisions with limits, I think, to the kinds of revenues it can expect in the next little while , with the reduction in the amounts of money that will be avail able in terms of cost-sharing commitments, some of which are going to rise substantially in the next period of time, there is a need for the kind of technique to be adopted that is referred to in the rport and that I've tried to describe in terms of zero-base budgeting .

MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Elmwood . MR. DOERN: Well, Mr. Chairman, the Minis ter outlines with great vigour a concept and it just strikes me that this kind of an approach may have some validit y where one is producing a product like peanut butter, jars of peanut butter, or spark plugs or some other commodity where you can measure the quantity , you can measure your output, you can measure your profits, you can gauge the market , etc .

But I'm not sure that these marvelous techniques which he's placing such great faith in can be effective in terms of government because of the fact that you 're providing in most cases services . I think it's been proven time and time again that although business experience is valuable , like any other experience, having run a company, having been a manager, is helpful in being in government , it does not ensure the fact that a person will be a competent or capable political leader . In fact there's all sorts of examples that would prove the opposite of that.

I'm saying to the Minister again , I ask him this question once more , I want him to tell me what he eJtpects to hear when the Minister of Education comes into the room and sits down opposite 2478

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 him sometime next fall or late in the year and starts describing what he's going to produce. I mean, I assume he's going to say, "We're going to produce sound little minds in sound little bodies; that's going to be our goal." What does the Minister expect to hear, for instance, from somebody who runs a department like Education? In Highways, it might be easy, you might talk about roads of X length for X dollars per mile but I'm saying: What does he expect to hear the Minister of Education tell him in terms of quantifying an output? -(Interjection)- Yes.

And secondly, what does he expect to hear the following year , having heard it the first year, does he want new and novel arguments? MR. SPIVAK: Well , I don't think that I'm going to be able to convince the Member for Elmwood about this very much because he seems to be convinced that this is something that is not within the capacity of government. I should point out that President Carter ran an election in the United States on the basis of his experience in Georgia where zero-base budgeting has in fact been introduced ... MR. DOERN: did it work? MR.

SPIVAK: Well , it's working in Georgia right now , and there are other governments who, in fact , have adopted it. If you want me to deal in a general way with Education, I can. I would expect that the Minister of Education once the position has been set up that wehave a proper information system - and I want to stop at this point. Without a proper information system, it doesn't function, and that proper information system is a very simple one, but it still has to quantify .

You have to know the target or group of people whom you 're dealing with, you have to be able to relate that information and quantify it, you have to be able to see whether in a given year those targets have been met, and if they haven't been met , then you have to understand why they haven't been met. If there's been overexpenditure, you have to understand why there has been overexpenditures. If your support services in one phase of the program appear to be higher than the other, then you have to understand why.

If it's simply because there are people within the Civil Service who are still remainng within the Civil Service and there 's been no desire for anyone to change their positions, then you have to simply say, well, do you want to continue that way, or do you want to alter and change it?

If, in fact , there are attendant costs, whatever those costs may be with respect to the program, they will have been quantified the year before and you'll be able to make a judgment as to whether in fact the information in front of you, whether it's been met, whether in fact that program should be continued or altered because of the lack of expenditure in this area, or the overexpenditure, or the numbers having been different.

Now, the point is that there's an attempt to do this, but it's not quantified in the way which will give you the basis for a constant review, which I mean is the review throughout the year, nor at this present time is it structured in such a way that the managers are in a position to really manage . Half the time of government has been spent in the last period of time simply passing paper back and forth with civil servants who are asking for permission to be able to proceed with those things that have in fact been voted.

I'm suggesting that once a vote has been given, once the approval has been given, that the manager be given the authority to manage . The problem here is because there's no bottom line of profit, and there's no way of measuring it in the same way as business . You have to establish and quantify to the extent that you can, the things that can in fact be quantified in terms of programs, and having done that, you have some measurement to be able to make that judgment. That's required. It's require in government today, and I don't think it's such an impossible system .

It's going to be required, I suggest by all the social service agencies in Manitoba, those who are the private agencies . There is no way that there is going to be a continual funding, as I can see it, without an attempt to try and develop a proper management information system, which in fact will allow for a quantification and identification of the target or groups that people in a volunteer way are supposed to be trying to assist, or a program that's trying to achieve a certain objective.

Unless we have that , there's no way there can be measurements of whether the dollars spent here or the dollars spent there are correct. So I don't see any difficulty. If you went through the Department of Education, you could take every branch, you can take every division, you can quantify and indicate what the target or group was supposed to be, what was supposed to happen; if there were supposed to have been 50 meetings held during a given period of time, you'll know whether those 50 meetings have been held. If they haven't been held, then the question will ask why ' and then ask why it has to be continued.

If there were only 20 meetings instead of 50, then you can budget on the basis of 20 meetings and you'll be able to reduce your cost accordingly. 2479

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 That's what has to happen. Right now, that's not the process. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Elmwood. MR. DOERN: I would ask the Minister, in other words, contained in this report is his recommendation on school trustees, that if the trustees are not operating in a satisfactory manner to the government, that the government will crack the whip and do something about it. MR. SPIVAK: That's not what it says. MR. DOERN: No? Well, that's what some people think it says.

For instance, Allen Rouse, who I believe is the President, or is a prominent school trustee in a division close to home, I believe he said that he wouldn't stand for it and neither would the other school trustees . They are supposed to have some autonomy and then the government was going to start withholding grants. This would be adverse, as far as they are concerned. I also say to the Minister, he talks about Georgia. He gives us one example . One example, the state of Georgia. My information is that the state of Georgia didn't do all that well.

I'm quoting a friend of mine - I'll have to get more information on it - but I can only say this that I don 't know whether the state of Georgia is doing very well, but President Carter isn't doing very well. He is not very popular, he's not doing too well in the polls, and all I know is that Teddy Kennedy is doing well, partly because, I think , the President is doing poorly . But this is this great President , of course, who accepted zero-base budgeting, which now Manitoba is stampeding towards. MR. SPIVAK: Well, I agree with the Member for St.

Johns, President Carter is a Conservative and obviously Senator Kennedy is a New Democrat. MR. DOERN: Mr. Chairman , another point.

The Minister talks , I think rather glibly about the fact that Manitoba should move toward - these are his words - "Manitoba should move toward a system of financial controls." I mean , is he telling me, that over the last decades, the Roblin administration set up a program, which I think was implemented, maybe in the Roblin years and then followed in the Weir years and thenfollowed in the Schreyer administtion and so on, is he telling me in effect, that in the past, since let 's say at least 1958, the last 20 years, there really haven 't been effective management controls in the Manitoba Government?

That under the Conservative administration, there were poor controls or no controls? That management committee wasn't a very effective group , that the New Democratic administration then carried that on and it coinued to be as ineffective as it was before, and that now we're going to have zero-base budgeting, and this is the millennium? We're now going to have really efficient cost controls and budgeting and everything else, until of course, a new system is discovered, and then we'll all discover that we were not doing very well at all and that what we were doing in the past was a complete waste of time .

I'd like the Miniter to answer that , and I would also like to ask him whether he visualizes a government run by bookkeepers and accountants? That's what I hear. We're going to have a group of bookkeepers, accountants, and economists , they're going to tell everybody else what to do, because the other poor simpletons don 't know anything about how to run a government. The way you run a government is, you look at the dolla rs. That's the only way you run it. You don 't look at services , you don't look at human considerati ons or compassion, you don 't dal with such a thing called quality.

What you do, basically , is you look at dollars . You get so many dollars and you produce certain quantities of statistics , and if you reach those targets, then you get more money . So I'm asking the Minister, what does he visualize here, a bunch of CAs sitting around the Cabinet table juggling statistics? Is that what we're moving tow ard ? MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Chairman, what I visualize is that you will have a bunch of politicians who are Cabinet Ministers who are going to make decisions on correct information, which is as complete as it can be for the decisions to be made.

The problem point of government today is that it's much larger than it was ten or fifteen years ago , government is involved, and the procedures that we have, I do not think, are as good as they can be, and the concept of financial control which zero-base budgeting would give, I think is a means towards a better system . That simply highlights , I think, the problem areas of the past.

The problem areas are very simple , that in effect if there are programs that have to be altered because of whatever the change , because they're not meeting the need, because there has been some lack of policy somewhere , because in effect the costs overrun are too high, or the costs are less, that it takes an enormous amount of time and effort before they're caught in time for alterations and changes to be made. In some cases, it requires researchers to 2480

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 research for a year or two, and then after a program , after a two or three year research is altered and changed, when it should have oeen changed two years earlier when the research commenced, simply because that correct information is not in front of the individual Cabinet Ministers, or in turn the policy group, whoever they may be within Cabinet, who have to undertake and make the final determination and decision. $ I've tried to indicate that the checks and balances within the system have been based on now , the theory of management committee , before a theory of Treasury Board which had a different kind of structure, but which involved a tremendous amount of the manager's time , back and forth, and a tremendous amount of paper work in determining the final decisions for the expenditures of money .

It would seem to te that you are far better off to devise a system which the managers can manage without that control, but the control is within the information system and a treasury committee made up of staff Ministers as opposed to line department Ministers , who in fact would have the responsibility of measuring and evaluating and being able to alter and change those programs without having to wait for the delays of the years that have happened in many cases . We can cite examples, but I don 't think it's necessary . By the way , this is not a reflection on the previous government.

I think it's a reflection on all governments . There's a need now for more accurate and correct information so that the policy decis ions , the numbers of which are very very high , that have to be made by any government today, and they are high in terms of the numbers that have to be undertake , that they may, as best they can , on the basis of as accurate information as you have. Otherwise , what happens is, it takes a process, a long process, before the alterations and hifts can occur, and that requires additional research , additional consultants , further information .

If, in fact , the management information system is designed properly , if in fact you go to zero-base budgeting , if in fact the managers are given the authority to manage, I believe you can adapt that system to a much quicker and better way.

And the value of that will be both savings, and the value as well will be that in the long run the policy decisions then can be determined by the policy people , who do not have to be involved in the day-to-day administration, and the Minister and the line people who are responsib le as managers can manage , and those who are the staff Ministers can in fact administer the government , and I think that this is necessary , with direct accountability of those people who were involved in the administration of government , to a Minister .

That function, I think is very different than the kind of way in which we've operated in the past. I think it's an evolution really, or an evolving system from what has happened in previous years . I think that governments are much more complex ; I think there is a need for a continual assessment of the value of programs. As I indicated before , governments exist to be able to serve the needs of people and not to be in a position to become a creature of its own and be maintained simply because it existed in the past.

There is a need for a real understanding that yearly there will be an assessment, and a valuable assessment made of the continuity of the program, and of the continuation of those who are within the system, because that has to be measured and tested and quantified against those who are to receive the service , and the nature of service , and whether , .1 in fact , that's been done . That information is pretty valuable . MR. DOERN: Would the Minister accept that there are certain goals of government that cannot be quantified , or does he think everything can be quantified? MR.

SPIVAK: No, I accept that there are certain goals of government that cannot be quantified but at the same time I think once you 've established the goal and you've hit out for a target, that there is a way in which you can at least establish in some formal way, what you're trying to do.

And whatever the program, if you have an income security program, then you're trying to reach a targeted group , you can have an estimate of what that targeted group is, and you can continually monitor and determine whether you are in fact meeting that group, whether you're meeting in fact another group, whether the group has increased , whatever the circumstances are, or the group has decreased, whethe r the money that's being spent has in fact been delivered, whether your costs of service are relatively the same as the delivery of costs of services in other areas , and if they 're not , why they 're not , and what changes should occur, so that in effect when you make the assessment, you can then deal in the next year of carrying out that general policy but with specific information of alterations and changes that should be made in order to try and make it more efficient.

I don 't think that should be of such a concern if it can be done . Now, the question is whether it can be done. I'm saying to you that the way the system is operating now, it's not quantified in that way, the evaluations do not occur in that matter, and there is need for a much more modern technique, and this is why governments are considering moving towards this . This is why we propose this as a consideration , recognizing again that the transitional period would be very hard . It's not going 2481

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 to be easy, but nevertheless, it would accomplish the results that I've talked about before. 1 don't want to repeat it again , there's no need, I've already put it on the record. MR. DOERN: Mr. Chairman, I listened to the Minister for the last ten or fifteen minutes, and what he seems to be saying is tbat this whole Task Force deals with the bureaucracy . It deals with the problems of the bureaucracy. It deals with management.

Once the decisions are made, you plug in the Task Force Report and it doesn 't really matter who's in charge and it doesn 't really matter what the goals of the government are, in that regard this Task Force is neutral. I'm simply saying to the Minister, would he have us believe for a split second that this Task Force went in in an objective way and just looked at the dollars and looked at the organization of the government without reference to the goals of government, without reference to philosophy , ideology, aim , direction , without reference to the fact that the New Democratic Party was in office.

All it did was go in and say nothing and have no implications in regard to government goals and objectives . This is simply sort of a mechanical procedure ; it would work well under the Social Credit Party, under Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats, or whatever, because it's neutral. It's a neutral study with neutral findings and neutral conclusions and neutral objectives and this is what he has presented . In other words, it's sort of a brilliant technocracy , this is what the Minister visualizes . Well , I would suggest something different, Mr. Chairman .

I would suggest that people went in with preconceived notions, people went in and were either told what to produce or they understood tacitly what goals to produce and then they came up with certain conclusions and scrambled to find something to back it up with. So I'm saying , I don't believe the Minister when he says, in effect , that what he has produced is a neutral scientific tool that can be used by his government and by our administration in the future.

I think what he's done is he's produced an organization that has had a set of objectives which they have tried to reach and back up and that they were political in design and that this thing is shot full of political biases, etc . MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Chairman , the Member for Elmwood 's statement is sheer , utter nonsense and I say that -(Interjection)- No, it 's not true, it's an opinion and i say it's sheer , utter nonsense . Mr.

Chairman, there has been a continual attempt on the part of the members opposite to somehow or other tag this with a document that did not deal in a fundamental way with the objectives of government. I want to tell the members opposite that when the review teams went in - and I'm quite aware of what happened - the first thing they asked the departmental people that they dealt with: What were your objectives? They asked them, yes, they asked them .

In many case, you know , those who were the departmental people who were within the previous government could not say what their objectives were , notwithstanding that the government had been in eight years . Now, let me just explain it.

They could not say what the objectives were for the simple reason that in many cases the policy determinations hadn't been made ; in some cases there was confusion of policy determination because they did not know whether the Planning Secretariat's policies were , in fact , their policies ; in some cases the departmental people assumed the policy to be a certain policy and therefore carried it out in that way. So, I want to tell the honourable members opposite that very clearly there was confusion in terms of objectives .

Now what we've attempted to try and do in terms of the reorganization - and we've done this - is to try in a very simple way to restate what the objectives of the department should be and we've presented them on that basis because the reorganization that's proposed is proposed on the basis of the objectives that are set forth . These are not necessarily the objectives that were carried out before in a general way by some of the departments .

So, I simply say, I cannot prevent the members opposite, nor do I expect them to stop from saying the things that they are saying , they are perfectly entitled to say it and they will say it over and over again but the argument is not correct and I place that on the record . MR. DOERN: A brief question or two , Mr. Chairman , then I'll pass to one of my colleagues and so on. The Minister is telling me then that he . .. I assume that a typical conversation might have gone like this when he says to a senior civil servant under a new government change, " What were your objectives and so on?

", I suppose that one could almost predict the kind of answer that one would obtain . It would be an answer that would tend to please the person asking the question . Maybe the debate went , " What are your objectives , sir? " and when the Minister states the new objectives , then that would be palatable to the senio r civil servant and so on. I would simply conclude on this particular point at this time and say to the Minister again, when he visualizes an ideal Cabinet , from what I gather he's again visualizing a Cabinet of chartered accountants or bookkeepers .

This is what he thinks would be a great government , people who can 2482

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 examine figures, people who are familiar with working with figures and nothing else. That would be the ideal political Cabinet in relation to what he tells us the Task Force is all about. I would suggest the ideal Cabinet is one that has teams of chartered accountants and other people working for them but not running the show . MR.

SPIVAK: I would agree that the ideal kind of Cabinet would be a Cabinet which would be a reflection of the people in the prov ince in its makeup and its composition representing the areas throughout the province but I have to suggest that it should not be one that would contain the former Member for Elmwood . MR. CHAIRMAN: I might inform all members of the committee - Can I have your attention, please? - inform all members of the committee that I have been instructed that there will be no Private Members' Hour today and that it's an agreement worked out between the two House Leaders, I'm told.

The Member for Inkster . MR. GREEN: On a point of order . People were canvassed to see whether they wished to proceed with anything in Private Members ' and we didn 't f ind anything. If there is somebody who wanted to proceed with one of the matters in Private Members' , then we will go back to Private Members' but we didn 't find anybody that wanted to go ahead with anything. MR. CHAIRMAN: I can ask all members present, is that the situation as far as your concerned?

Agreed? (Agreed) All right, then we will proceed with committee and the next speaker is the Member for Lac du Bonnet who, I understand, is going to defer to the Member for Inkster. MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman , I'd like to indicate that I believe that there is a fundamental fallacy with regard to what the Minister is saying which, in my mind, brings into great doubt the conclusions and the recommendations that the Task Force has made. The fundamental fallacy is that there are some people who are able to apply very efficient business methods which , if translated to government, would result in great savings .

Of course, Mr. Chairman , no substantiation is put forward for this position , it is merely relied on and then proceeded with . It doesn't bear examination . Once one goes , Mr. Chairman, into the so-called method which has achieved great saving, one doesn't find great savings at all. As a matter of fact, one finds abuse in expenditures which could never happen within the public sector and do not happen within the public sector . One also finds, Mr.

Chairman, that the publ ic in following misdirected representation gets to policies such as were exemplified in the paper last week which no business would subscribe to: cost first, needs last. No business will operate on that principle . A business would operate on the basis of what are its objectives , what are its needs , what costs are required to meet those needs and then how does one realize those costs if they are realizable.

Of course , if they are not realizable, then one doesn 't go into business because the amount of money that will come in in order to deal with the objectives that the business has set for itself would be less than sufficient and the business would not continue . But in following that kind of fallacy, one is led to formulate a policy on this type of objective which I don 't think was better articulated than in the area of all fields , the field of Health, which comes out , costs first, needs last. Now, Mr. Chairman, I dispute the fact that any private sector business would proceed on that basis .

Secondly, I dispute the fact that private business has found a method of operation which is more efficient and therefore when translatable to the public will result in government savings . Now how do I know this, Mr. Chairman?

Well , first of all, we know it with regard to every private business which has had the top of the tea kettle removed and the public then able to stare at what it is doing and find out what kind of expenditures take place because normally private expenditures are not subject to public scrutiny and the times that they are opened up and are, we find a mess which is so terrible that no government could survive for a day if they were permitted to exist. I name several examples , Mr. Chairman.

One was Atlantic Acceptance ; one was the Cornfield affair; one was the Brandon Packers incident in the Province of Manitoba, that private business was regarded in Brandon as being such a wonderful thing .

Paton and Cox were looked upon as captains of industry, people that would probably be appointed to the Task Force if the lid was not taken off . -(Interjection)- Yes, Churchill Forest Industries, that's another one, Mr. gchairman , that once the lid was open and we found out that it wasn 't private investment that was rushing into the province and that it was a private sector business using the public money for the purpose of its own gain, Mr. Chairman , that it doesn 't bear examination .

But even if we look at some of those that although they 're not completely open are at least available for public scrutiny , we find that the Great-West Life Assurance Company which is one of the principal groups that has been looked to by the 2483

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 of Manitoba, that in 1967 their expenses amounted to $22 million. In 1976, their xpenses amounted to $58 million, which is roughly three times their expenses with much less to do, much less to do - and I am not dealing with the commissions that are paid to the people who sell policies, I'm dealing with their administrative operative expenses. Nol what has happened in this business, Mr. Chairman? Their expenses have gone up some $22 million to $58 million a year and they will say, "Well, we are regulated by the competitive market." What competitive market?

The prices for all insurance are roughly the same. There is no competition in price. The established people in the industry will have a greater capacity for selling and then the insurance companies, many years ago, went to the government and made sure that anybody else who conducted a lottery would be put in jail. This was the competition that was permitted in the insurance industry . So, the insurance field was reserved to the insurance industry and protected by an umbrella by the public .

Nevertheless, their expenses went from $22 million to $58 million in one year and by the way, over the last three weeks when the shareholders of these - maybe more than three weeks, maybe six weeks - shareholders of this company have done nothing, done nothing, they've done no productive work to those who love the work ethic . Do you know what has happened to the value of their shares? I know because it happened to the value of mine . They've gone up from $72.00 to about $96.00 in eight weeks and this , Mr.

Chairman, is millions and millions of dollars that have been accrued by people who have not added one ounce of work to their existing value. That's what's happened to the shareholdings of the Great-West Life Assurance Comtany. But when we look at what is happening, Mr. Chairman , is the Great-West Life Assurance Company president or the directors building offices for less money than the Minister of Public Works? Mr. Chairman, are they driving automobiles less desirable than those driven by the Ministers of the Crown? Are their offices less adequately furnished? Are they given less salaries?

Are they less adequately taken care of? Are the rugs in their offices of less quality? Well, the answer, Mr . Speaker, is that they are not. The fact is that private spending in the private sector has not shown itself to be more efficient spending than in the public sector . As a matter of fact, it has been shown to be less efficient. We've looked at an aircraft factory in the Province of Manitoba that produced 13 planes and almost certified another on a total expenditure of roughly $40 million .

It was a problem and it's not something which I can look back to with great satisfaction except the satisfaction that we were willing to try to do something - $40 million . Mr. Chairman, in the private sector, we have one company that spent that amount , or close to that amount, on bribes alone, on bribes alone .

Didn't produce anything but bribed the purchasers to purchase for it to the extent of roughly $30 million and that was an open book and it became an open book and they said , " Well, this is what one has to do in order to make money ." Well, how are those people going to come in here and teach the public sector to do a job. Mr. Chairman , the public sector could go in there and teach them to do a job. The honourable member says they have reduced $10 million by their restraint program with the "hoo ha" of the Great-West Life.

A year ago in the fall, we reduced $20 million with no help from the Great-West Life. $20 million , we doubled it. So they owe us $10 million, Mr. Chairman , when they talk about restraint. Nobody disagrees, nobody, Mr. Chairman, disagrees with restraint. -(Interjection)- The Minister indicates he disagrees with restraint. -(Interjection)- He disagrees with the figure , Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the figure that was given - if he doesn 't believe that , Mr. Chairman, then he is calling the Minister of Finance a liar, because the figure I got , the figure I got - Mr.

Chairman , will you try to subdue the Member for River Heights who is having a problem. -(lnterjection) He doesn't, well , then shut up. The fact is that the Minister of Finance came out and produced a figure of $10 million, Mr. Chairman . MR. SPIVAK: Why dont you sit down? MR. GREEN: Oh, I'm going to use my time . MR. SPIVAK: I don't mind you speaking , why don't you sit down . MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman, I don't wish to sit down . I wish to stand. Unless the rule says I must sit down I'm going to stand . MR. CHAIRMAN: You are permitted to stand if you wish . MR. GREEN: Thank you.

I get much more consideration from you than I get from the Member 2484

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 for River Heights. MR. SPIVAK: Be accurate. MR. GREEN: Mr. Chairman , I admit that maybe I am not accurate . And the reason I am not accurate is I am using the Minister of Finance 's figures and the Minister of Finance's figures are very dubious and are subject to complaints about their accuracy. The Minister of Finance gave the figure that was accomplished by the restraint program, as roughly $11 million. Mr. Chairman , that is the figure that he gave. The other types of restraint that my honourable friend is talking about are not restraint at all.

For a Minister of the Crown to resort to talking about reductions in departmental Estimates as being part of restraint is to use, and it was best put by Bob Stanfield, that this would only be resorted to by people who were desperate to show that they did something, when in fact they accomplished nothing. And that 's what he said about using reductions from the departmental Estimates to prove that you have reduced spending . The fact is, Mr.

Chairman, that on last year's figures , the Conservative Government of today is increasing the budget and have used figures of 4 percent , if you use the absolute figures that you've been using over the year , their increase this year was just as high as our increase last year , in dollars. In dollars, Mr. Chairman, it's the same. And the reason is, the reason given by the member - you know, he won't listen to anybody - but the reason given by the Minister of Health, $600 million of the budget , that's over 1/3, what did he get up? Did he tell horror stories? He said it was an exceedingly well-managed department.

And I believe that I am being less complimentary than was the Minister of Health. That has come through , vis-a-v is virtually every department, because , Mr. Chairman, that is what happened . There are possibilities for anybody , and I do not deny it, to take a budget of $1,600,000 ,000 and reduce it. If you reduced it by $16 million it would be one percent. So, there is the problem with a budget of $1,600,000 ,000, and I'm not suggesting there's not.

I'm not suggesting that the people in management committee , and the people in our departments, could not do a good job in helping you reduce that budget, even in conservative terms . What I object to is getting these guys in the private sector, who have never shown that they can reduce anybody 's spending, particularly their own, and say that all you have to do is apply their methods to our government , and we will be spending less money . Well , Mr. Chairman, what are their methods? You know, I've been in the private sector , and I have been associated with the private sector .

When I was in Newfoundland and wanted to come home to Winnipeg and the flight did not leave until the next day and I would have had to stay over, I had no problem . Falconbridge took me home and it was very nice of them . Did they have to worry about getting to the airport on time and meeting the plane? No, Mr. Chairman, we went in our "our" plane, that is, the Falconbridge plane . And it was a very nice plane , and it took me from Newfoundland to Toronto, and I was then able to go from Toronto to Winnipeg by the public service, what do we call it? - economy .

The people in the private sector are not travelling on the kind of expenses that the people in the public sector are travelling on, nor do they have a guy who will get up in the House and say, what did you spend, what hotel did you stay in, and how much did you pay for dinner? Which can be asked in this House, and I agree with it . I'm not objecting to that at all. When I was travelling at publ ic expense I always knew that I travelled on the basis that what I spent was available for the public to see, if and when they chose to look at it. But Mr.

Chairman , do you think that the private sector has something to teach us in this connection? I went home in the Falconbridge plane, I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, it is much nicer than an Air Canada plane , and the entertainment is nicer, and the surroundings are nicer. I have nothing against Falconbridge . Nothing. I believe that they are entitled to their plane, they earned it under the rules of the game that were set for them , and they are entitled to have it at their disposal. But to tell me that they can reduce my expen diture on the basis of their practice is a fallacy. What about Tantalum?

I was asked in the House whether Flyer had built a cottage . Well , Flyer did , indeed, have a cottage . You know where it came from? It came from the private sector firm that built Flyer. They also built a cottage , and the cottage was at the disposal of the executives of that company, and I'm not objecting to that. If that's what they want to do, that 's their concern. But they are not to tell me that they can introduce an efficiency in the private secto r - and the Flyer cottage is a shack compared to the Tantalum cottage . Go to the Bernie Mine, it's yours and mine. It's ours .

We not only own 25 percent in a mine , thank God , well, I guess I should thank Mr. Banman , is he the same? But the fact is, Mr. Chairman , that we have a very nice guest home at Bernie Lake . It is a guest home that I would be happy to place in a street in Tuxedo and the neighbours would be proud of it . That' s in the private sector, Mr. Chairman . Now , we are asked about restraint. There is a need for restraint. We are too spoiled . We are 2485

Tuesday, May 23, 1978 too fat. I am waiting to hear from the private sector that the hotels in the city of Winnipeg , including the International Inn, in a policy of restraint, are now changing sheets once a week. That they are now changing sheets once a week, or even twice a week, or even every six days, as I count the 14th, the 15th, the 16th, the 17th, the 18th, the 19th, that a guest would stay in one of those hotels, and have his sheets changed on the 14th, and then not until the 19th. These are the people , Mr. Chairman, that we are told will help us reduce our expenditures . Mr.

Chairman, we had an example in the House today, which I will make use of more on another Estimates, but it's singular absence from this Task Force indicates just what was being looked at. If there is any place that you guys would have saved money to your advantage because they are going to be your albatross , it's Information Services. You've got in Information Services a bunch of amateur politicians who think that they can do you a favour by writing press releases and sending them out. The favour that they did you was they said that there was a 30 percent increase in highway expenditures . Now , Mr.

Chairman , if it's mentioned in the report, and I'm making a mistake, then I will .. . -(Interjection) - it's mentioned. All right. If it's mentioned , Mr. Chairman, then I have to apologize to the Minister and the members of his force . But , Mr. Chairman, if it had been mentioned , and it's one of the things that can be done , why not this year? Do you know that of all the expenditures that have gone down like sheets in hospitals, Information Services has gone up. And the salary aspect of it has gone from $280,000 to $330 ,000.00 .

But even if we ignore the salary aspect of it, the whole amount has gone up in a greater percentage than the other general expenses of the government . Now, if they were looking for a way to eliminate unnecessary services, or if the government was looking for a way, and if the Task Force suggested that it be done, then more power to them , I'll find something good , finally, in the Task Force . -(Interjection)- I'm glad that it's there. And if it's there, Mr. Chairman, pardon me? Sure, Sure. MR.

SPIVAK: " It is recommended that the Information Services Branch should no longer produce tape, audio, or photographmaterial that would normally be produced by the media . The branch's current budget of $406,000 should be reviewed with the intention of achieving reduction. " MR.

GREEN: But then, I have to say that if that 's what they got out of the Information Services Branch, then they have succeeded in taking a mountain and turning it into a molehill, because if they are merely saying that you should stop taking the photographs , you should stop taking the clips, but that you should continue writing the stories , this is the part that I most object to. The part that I object to about Information Services is people paid by the government, paid by the public of the province of Manitoba, to write poli tical releases for the Conservative Party .$ MR.

SPIVAK: They wrote eight years for you . Did you object to it? Did you change it? MR

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-2-47a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 2nd hansardpdf 47a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e383ef56b3c4618680bec18ec886776b8d5513d2

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