Manitoba Hansard — 29 November 1977 (Sitting 4, 31st Legislature, 1st Session)

31-1-4

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

ISSN 0542-5492 First Session - Thirty-First Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Vol. XXV No. 4 26 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Harry E. Graham Speaker 10:00 a.m.Tuesday, November 29, 1977 Printed by P. N. Crosbie - Queens Printer for the Province of Manitoba

TIME: 10:00 a.m. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY of MANITOBA Tuesday, November 29, 1977 OPENING PRAYERby Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER, Honourable Harry E. Graham(Birtle-Russell): Presenting Petitions; Reading and Receiving Petitio ns; Pr esenting Repo rts by Stan ding and Special Co mmittees. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Fina nce. HON. DONALD W. CRAIK(Riel): Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a shor t state ment regarding Manitob a income taxatio n. Mr.

Speaker, the perso nal income tax rate in Man itoba at 56 percent is among the highest in Canada and the same is true of the rates of tax on corporations- 13 percent for small bus iness and 15 percent fo r large business as defined under the Federal In come Tax Act. This new government has already begun the proc ess of tax reduction throu gh a series of expenditure restraint measures and through the elimination of succession duties, gift taxes and mineral acreage taxes.

I now wish to announc e fur ther reductions to encourage private spending and investment and thus add impetus to economic expansion in our prov ince. First, effective January 1, the Man itoba perso nal income tax rate will be reduced from 56 percent to 54 percent.. This 2.0 basic rate reduction represents approxi mately $13.6 million and the indexing related increase in cost of living tax credit benefits a fu rther $2.5 million. The cost of living tax credit increase does not affect 19 78-79 revenues but occurs upon filing the 1978 tax return.

On the corporatio n side, ou r government believes that the first priority must be to reduce taxes for small busi nesses. We also propose then a 2.0or 15 percent reduction in the rate applicable to small bus iness in Man itob a effective Januar y 1 and setting then the rate at 11 percent. This rate reduction will bring our rate to the same level as Alberta's, the lowest in Western Canada. Since approximately 80 percent of the bus inesses in Manitoba are defined as small un der cu rrent income tax

definitions, it is clear that this reduction will have a beneficial impact on on e of the most important segments of our economy. The lowering of the small bus iness income tax rate is expected to reduce corporation income tax revenues by arou nd $2.6 million next year. In accordance with our tax collection agreement with the federal government, legislation to effect both the perso nal and corporation income tax cuts annou nced here will be introduc ed at the regular spr ing session of this legis latu re.

The purpose in annou ncing the changes at this time is to faci litate the printing of the approp riate forms by the federal government fo r 1978 distri butio n. Mr . Speaker, I have passed out a set of comparative tables to accompany this statement. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member fo r Seven Oaks. MR. SAUL A. MILLER: Thankyou, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I just received the copy of the statement issued by the Minister of Fina nce. It comes as no su rprise because certainly this is one of the key planks in the Conservative campaign.

I wo uld want to point ou t, however, that in fact Manitob a's total tax impact on people is amongst the lowest in Canada and has been amongst the lowest in Ca nada. When you take the entire tax impact into accoun t and the tax credit system which we introduc ed which made fo r a more equitab le tax impost, the taxes in Manitob a, I know and they know, are, in tact, amongst the lowest in Canada. By th is step they are simply, as I say, honouring a pledge that they've made. Whether, in tact, it will benefit the majority of Manitob ans, I very seriously questio n.

I don't dou bt that the lowering of the tax rates from 56 to 54 will mean something to so me peop le, mostly in the higher income brackets. Those, let's say in 20,000, assuming they are a typical married tax filer with two dependents, at the $20,000 income level he'll save all of perhaps $29.00 a year. It's a great saving. On the other hand so mebody in the same size fam ily with a $75,000 income will save about $265 or perhaps double that. So you see, Mr. Speaker, this is a reduction that I su ggest to yo u is a reduction on the perso nal side benefiting the highest income peop le in Manitoba.

Only time, of course, will tell whether,! in fact, they will retain those aspects of our taxes which we felt made it the most equ itable in Canada, which did, in fact, redistribute income and make it possible for people in lower incomes to benefit most through our prop erty tax credit system and through our cost of living tax credit system. Only time will tell whether they'll continue that aspect as well' because if they don't then Man itoba will move from being a fair tax provi nce to a tax provi nce which favours the favo ured few. MR. SPEAKER: Notice s of Motio n ... Introduc tio n of Bill s.

ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Member to r Br andon East. 81

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 MR. LEONARD S. EVANS: Mr . Speaker, in view of the state ment just made by the Minister of Fi nance regarding the reductio n in perso nal income tax rates and corpo rate income tax rates and considering the government's great desire for a balanced bu dget etcetera, in elimination of deficits, can he advise the House whether he is now contemplating either an elimination or a downward revision of the prop erty tax rebate system. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Fi nance. MR. CRAIK: The answer, Mr. Speaker, is no.

We plan no reductio ns in annou ncing this in the property tax rebate. We plan no increases in the sales tax, as a matter of fact whether it's this session or next session we will prob ably make so me annou ncements regarding changes, albeit minor changes in the Bales tax Set to clear up some of the contrad ictions and nuisance aspects of the sales tax as well. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member fo r Br andon East with a su pplementary qu estion. MR. EVANS: Mr .

Speaker, I'm glad to hear the Minister of Fi nance say that he is not contemplating any changes.downward revisions of the property tax rebate system because it seems to me that for some number of sessions he stated the contrary, that he didn't believe in that. However, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask him about a parallel tax relief system that the New Democratic Pa rty government brought in, a very progressive system, and that is the cost of living tax credit system.

And again that's related and I'd like to ask the Honou rable Minister of Fi nance whether he has any plans or intentio ns or thoughts of eliminating the cost of living tax credit system. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, if the Member for Br andon East had listened to the press statement or to the stat ement I just read to him he wo uld see that there is an amount tagged on to the increase in the cost of living credits, in that statement. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member fo r Br andon East with a fina l sup plementary. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, I didn't have the benefit of the written stat ement and I heard the reference to indexing and so on and the 2.5 million, I heard the 13.6 and I heard the 2.5 but I'm not I'm talking, Mr. Speaker ... MR. SPEAKER: Order 8 please ... or der please. HON. WARNER JORGENSON (Morris): On a point of or der, Mr. Speaker, I'm sur e that the Member for Kildonan is just gnash ing his teeth in anguish over the kind of qu estions that are being asked from that side of the house.

Now the honourable member knows full well and indeed, when he was on this side of the House he ins isted that when a member rises on that side during this period of our deliberations that he asks a qu estion and not makes a speech as the honou rable member is attempting to do now. Accor ding to our rules the questio n must be asked without any prefacing. That was the rule that was insisted on by the Member fo r Kildonan. I wonder why honourable gentlemen opposite now do not want to insist on that kind of questioni ng. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Br andon East on a point of or der. MR.

EVANS: On that same point of or der, Mr . Speaker, perhaps the honourable member is quite correct in his ob servations but I can only say that I've sat on that side of the Ho use fo r eight years and I learned some lessons from that honour able member, the Minister without portfolio, Ill, but as a su pplementary questio n, Mr.

Speaker, I'm still not clear and I'd like the people of Manitoba to be clear whether or not you are going to eliminate what is referred to as the cost of living tax credit system as a tax relief system apart from any reference to the perso nal income tax - these are two different things that we're talking about, I believe. And that's what I'd like to know and that's what the people of Manitoba would like to know. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Fi nance. MR. CRAIK: For the second time, Mr. Speaker' I'll answer the member's question, and that is, read the press release.

Read the state ment that was read to you in this Hou se. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member fo r Seven Oaks. MR. MILLER: Mr . Speaker, I wo uld like to correct so me figures I gave - I would n't want them to appear incor rectly in Ha nsard. The reduction from 56 to 54, I indicated would represent $29 per annum on a gross income of $20,000 - that should be $58 per annum on a gross income of $20,000, and instead of a savi ngs per year of $265 on a gross income of $75,000, it's a tax saving of $330, so the comparative benefits at $58 to the $20,000 earner and $330 to the $75,000 earner. 82

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Fort Ro uge. MR. LLOYD AXWORTHY: Mr. Speaker, I have a question fo r the minister responsible fo r housing. In the latest Central Mo rtgage and Hous ing report released fo r the end of October, it's indicated that only 872 public hous ing un its have been started in this provinc e si nce the beginning of 1977, which is substanti ally less than half the number of units that the previous government indicated would be bu ilt.

I wo nder if the Minister of Hous ing could indicate whether, in fact, that sub stantial decline will continue in the next two months of 1977, and if this is a product of direct government policy, or does he have any plans of co rrecting this serious shor tfal l? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Minister in charge of Man itob a public housing. HON. J. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Creek): To answer the member's questio n, Mr .

Speaker, the reason for the shor tfall of sta rts in public hous ing or family hous ing in Manitoba this year is the ones that are being presently bu ilt, that you speak of, were part of the 1976-1977 program, which has been continue d through 1977. We wo rked with a difference of CMHC year ending being calendar, ou r year ending being March. The reaso n fo r the 1977-78 program not being under way is the previous minister did not submit a program to Management Co mmittee to be approved and to be put in effect as it us ually was.

It was the previous government's fo rmula to present the program to Management Co mmittee, to see that it was wit hin the terms of the budget or moneys brou ght down. That program was not of ficially subm itted when I took office. We're wo rking very hard, very hard, to hit the deadline of to morrow's CMHC when the programs must be in to be approved, and aftert hat time, I think I'll be in a better position to announ ce the numbers to you . MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nou rable Member fo r Fort Rouge, with a sup plementary. MR. AXWORTHY: Yes, a sup plementary, Mr . Speaker.

Co uld the minister indicate that because of the fact that Central Mo rtgage and Hous ing works on a calendar year budget system, that the shortfall in hous ing, or the lack of applicatio n, will mean that substa ntial amounts of money will be returned to the federal government that other wise wo uld be used fo r hous ing in the provi nce of Man itoba in 1977? MR. JOHNSTON: Not necessarily. Not necessarily. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member fo r Fort Ro uge, with a final su pplementary. MR. AXWORTHY: Yes. Mr .

Speaker, when the minister says "not necessarily" could he indicate then that in the month that we have left to us, which is the CMHC calendar year - something better than thirty days - can he give us so me indication of how many applicatio ns Manitob a Ho using and Renewal Corporation intends to submi t in or der to make proper use of the allocated federal capital funds for public hous ing in this prov ince? MR. JOHNSTON: Approximately forty - we don't know whether they'll all be approved or not. Forty projects . MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Member fo r Selkir k. MR.

HOWARD PAWLEY: My question is directed to the Attor ney-General. Can the Atto rney General assur e this House that proceedings are continuing in or der to place Alexander Kasser on trial in Austria or to ob tain his retur n to Man itob a? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Atto rney-General. HON. GERALD W.J. MERCIER (Osborne): Yes. MR. SPEAKER: The Hono urable Member fo r Lac du Bo nnet. MR.

SAM USKIW: I'd like to ask the Minister of Fi nance whether it is that they are antici pating an increase in the deficit fo r the next fiscal year with this latest announcement, or whether they expect to raise revenues by other methods? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Minister of Fi nance. MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, I'll be able to give the members, I trust, an answer to that approximately Ma rch of 1978. 83

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Lac du Bo nnet. MR. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the minister in charge of the environment whether he's had an opportun ity to look into the questio n that I put to him yesterday and, if not, wo uld he give us an answer this afternoo n? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister. HON. BRIAN RANSOM' Minister of Mines, Resources and Environmental Management (Souris Killarney): Mr. Speaker, I believe that the prob lem that the honourable member refers to had to do with contamination of wells in the East Selkirk area.

I am info rmed that there were fo ur possible so urces of contamination there, that the most prob able on e is private sewage systems, but investigations are sti ll un der way at this time. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Member for Transco na. MR. USKIW: I have a sup plementary. Mr . Speaker, is it true, Mr. Speaker, that effluent flow ing from Right Angle Farms contained very large amoun ts of cau liform into the drainage ditch that flows into an aquifer? MR. RANSOM: I am inform ed, Mr.

Speaker, that monitoring of the situatio n is continuing, but that my advisers believe that the private sewage systems are the most likely so urce of contamination, but the issue has not been settled completely yet. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Lac du Bo nnet, on a final sup plementary. MR. USKIW: A sup plementary Mr . Speakeran the honour able minister' assur e me that there is no contamination from Right Aa ngle Farms ? Can he give me a definite answer that there is not contaminatio n from that farm? MR. RANSOM: No' Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I'm so rry, the Ho nourable Member fo r Transcon a. MR.

WILSON PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, my questio n is directed to the First Minister.

Is he aware that it was the Co alition on Family Law that or ganized last night's demonstration in front of the Legislatu re' and is he aware that those partici pating in last night's demonstr atio n included- this is a questio n - did he know then, Sir' did he know those included in the demonstratio n were the Winnipeg Council of Self-Help group s, the Co mmittee fo r Wo men Art ists, the Manitoba Association of Social Workers, the Wo men's Institute of Man itob a, the Federal Advisory Co uncil on the Status of Wo men, the Man itoba Action Co mmittee on the Status of Wo men, the Manitoba Association of Wo men and the Law, the Voice of Wo men, the Canadian Co ngress of Women, Un ited Na tio ns Association, a Wo men's Place, Man itob a Teachers' So ciety, Wo men's Lib eration, Manitob a Libr arians' Associatio n, Na tio nal Co uncil of Jewish Women, NO P Status of Women Co mmittee, Liberal Associatio n of Man itob a, the YWCA, the Un iversity Wo men's Club of Winnipeg' the Provincial Co uncil of Man itoba, the Diocese of Ru pertsland, Manitob a Association of Registered Nur ses, Provincial Organization of Bu siness and Professional Wo men's Clubs and the Ju nior League of Man itoba.

MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Government Hou se Leader. MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a Po int of Order again. I did not want to interrupt the honourable member in his maiden speech in th is Cha mber, but I want to draw to your attention, Sir, that a questio n that suppl ies its own answer is not permitted on Orders of the Day. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member fo r Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: I've wait ed fo r the First Min ister to respond. He has not responded and therefore I don't think he is aware.

Wo uld he undertake to meet the coalition on Family Law immediately to find ou t who this group is and who is su pporting it so that he will not make further misleading state ments about who or ganized last night's demonstration and fur ther mislead the public of Manito ba. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. HON. STERLING R. LYON (Premier)(Charleswood): Mr .

Speaker, I'm happy to have the alleged info rmation given by the Member fo r Transcona and I am sur e - I think I was reported as saying ou tside of the House - that the NO P and a number of other well intended organizations or ganized last night's meeting. With respect to the second part of his questio n my colleague the Attorn ey General I think has already made arrangements to meet with the coalition. 84

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Lo gan. MR. WILLIAM JENKINS: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. My qu estion is to the Ho nour able Minister of Labour who is also responsible fo r the Civil Service Co mmission. I wish to ask this questio n, Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister. What is the present status of the fo rmer Chairman of the Civil Service Co mmission of Man itoba? Is this person st ill on sa lary to the provincial government? MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Minister of Labour . HON. NORMA L. PRICE (Assiniboia): Mr .

Speaker, to the Honour able Member fo r Lo gan81 wo uld like to info rm him that he is sti ll a member of the. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member fo r Lo gan with a suppl ementary. MR. JENKINS: I wou ld like to then ask a su pplementary questio n. Is the fo rmer member being info rmed of meetings and is he being paid a salary at this time? MRS. PRICE: Mr . Speaker, I wou ld like to info rm the Member for Logan that he is being info rmed of the meetings. I don't know whether he's attending or not. MR. JENKINS: Mr . Speaker, throu gh you to the minister.

The minister has not answered one qu estio n which is, is the member on salary? And if he is not on salary is itt he intention of the minister to terminate him? And if so , is severance pay being considered? MRS. PRICE: Mr. Sp eaker, to the Member fo r Lo gan, he is on a per diem rate. MR. SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Lac du Bo nnet. MR. SAM USKIW: Mr . Speaker' I wo uld like to ask the . Pr emier whether he has had an opportun ity to read the legal contract between the Man itoba Agriculture Credit Co rpor atio n and its lessees under the Land Lease Program. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR.

LYON: Mr. Speaker, there were a number of contracts entered into by the MAGG and the lessees. To the best of my knowledge I haven't read one of them recently, I read one of them a year or so ago. MR. USKIW: Mr . Speaker, I wo uld like to then ask the Pr emier how it is that he indicated on a Poi nts West TV program that the contracts other than si nce last year did not contain a prov ision fo r the lessee to purchase the land, if he hasn't read the cont ract? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nour able Member for Ste. Rose. MR. A.R. (Pete) ADAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Fi nance.

In view of his stat ement th is morning, I apologize fo r missing the first part of his stat ement but I wo uld like to know if he can assure the House ... I wou ld like to know, Sir , ... well, the Minister of Health is getting into the act, but my qu estion is fo rt he Minister of Fi nance, Mr. Speaker. If he cou ld assur e the House that no reduction will occur to the municipalities on the sh aring of the income tax by reaso n of this reduction of 2 percent. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Minister of Fi nance. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, perhaps again to underline - the purpose of the announcement at this time is to facilitate the requirement to have the forms prepared by the federal government which come out fo r payroll deductio ns in 19 78. As far as replying to all the effects of the income tax reduction, the member will have to wait un til the budget is prepared fo r the next session of the legislature . But to answer him indirectly, because I can't give him a direct answer on all these thi ngs, it is not the intent in making this annou ncement to have an impact on other revenue so urces.

The intent of the announcement is to indicate that the government is carrying through with its undertaking that it has given the people of Man itob a that it intends to , in its estimation, sp ur the economy with the tools that this government feels are the most effective way of doing that and that's the reason fo r the annou ncement at this time - it's a technical one - but the purpose fo r the tax changes is intended to spur the economy, it is not intended to change the taxation levels or revenues of other sou rces. MR. SPEAKER: Has the Member for Ste. Rose a point of or der? MR. ADAM: My point of or der, Mr.

Speaker, is I have asked the Minister of Fina nce a very simple question: whether there wo uld be any reduction in the share allocated to the municipality under the 85

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 income tax shari ng percentage and he rises to make a speech in its place. I ju st want yes or no and not a speech. MR. SPEAKER: Order please. May I point out to the Ho nourable Member for Ste. Rose that the purpose of the question period is for members to ask qu estions. Min isters may, if they so desire, answer. Now, the Honou rable Member for Lac du Bon net. MR. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture whether in the spirit of a free Manitoba whether it is possible for producers producing prod ucts that are controlled by marketing boards to increase their production today or whether it is his intention to make it possible tomorrow or when, or what changes he is anticipating to make it possible for anyone not to be shackled by those regulations as they have indicated they were duri ng the last election campaign. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minister of Agriculture. HON. JAMES E. DOWNEY(Arthur): Mr.

Speaker, I believe in answer to that qu estion that that gets pretty much under the area of policy and will be dealt with by the government. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for Lac du Bon net on a supplementary. MR. USKIW: Yes, a supplementary qu estion. Can the minister assure me today that anyone wishing to enter production in any of those commodities may do so without regard to the qu ota limitations? MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourab le Member for Fort Rouge. MR.

AXWORTHY: Mr.nSpeaker, I have a qu estion for the Min ister of Health following on an answer he gave yesterday concerning Seven Oaks Ho spital when he indicated that the govern ment was undertak ing a review or a reassessment of that particular project. Could he indicate whether in fact the constru ction that may have been initiated by the company in qu estion has in fact also been halted while this review is going on? MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Min ister of Health . HON. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN(Fort Garry): Mr.

Speaker, the answer to that qu estion is no and I thank the honourable member for raising the question because I think there was some misinterpretation of the exchange between us yesterday. Constr uction has not halted. MR. AXWORTHY: Well, Mr. Speaker, in those circu mstances then, can the minister explain how the review is going to take place while the constru ction is going on.

Have they set certain terminal points for the construc tion company at which time they would cease constru ction if the review was in the negative or have they given any clear instru ction to the company involved exactly what the limits of the work should be while this review is taking place? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, the government is in a position where it feels the decision is still available in option for m althou gh it can't be postponed too long.

The pilings are in for the hospital, the hoarding is almost completed but no interior work of course is underway as yet pending comp letion of that stage; so the options are still open to the govern ment to move in a conversion manner, a redesigned manner, a reappl ication of the fac ility, those are all the things that are under review. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourab le Member for St. Jo hns. MR. SAUL M. CHERNIACK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wo uld like to address a question to the Minister of Fi nance.

In view of the fact that he has indicated today that there is a method by which you can prepare the way for retroactive legislation to take place next spring or even summer, would he explain to the taxpayers of Manitoba why he found it necessary to bring in legislation at this emergency special short session in order to bring in legislation on gift tax, succession duty and mineral acreage which cou ld have been done jus t as effectively by retroactive legislation next spring, with an annoknc ement today as he has done with income tax? Could he explain tha t waste of taxpayers' money? MR.

SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minister of Fi nance. · MR. CRAIK: Mr.nSpeaker,nwith regard to the mineral acreage tax, at least, Mr. Speaker, it would have been necessary to make a reba te of the '77 collections had the legislation not been changed. The bills, as he probably recal ls, go out towards the end of the year tor the entire year and would normally have gone out I suppose in December or Jjn uary for collection of '77 mineral taxes.

If there'd been legislation passed next spring, that money wo uld have had to be rebated which would n't have been an opti mum way of handling the situa tion, therefore the legislation in that case was 86

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 brought in at this time. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for St. Jo hns with a supplementary. MR. CHERNIACK: No, Mr. Speaker, I want the Minister of Fi nance to rest on his own answer. I would like to address a question to the Minister of Finance. In the expectation ... well, l'gl put it differently.

Is he making preparations to do some borr owi ng on the market for the province of Manitoba and, in anticipation of that, would he indicate to the legislature how he is planning to overcome the exaggerated claims of his own leader regardcng the deficit of the province and how is he going to explain to prospective lenders how it is that the province's credit will not be affected by the fact that faci ng a deficit and annou ncing an exaggerated deficit, the government is now annou ncing an indication of intentionally reducing the income of the province? MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, work ing backwards on the member's questions , with regard to the deficit position of the province and so-called exaggerated statements, the statements that were put out were put out by the Pr ovincial Auditor and were quo ted directly by members of the government in the statement to the public.

As far as moving back furthe r than that into the question of borrowi ng, the primary borrowi ng that has been going- and the last was during the time between October 11 th and 24th when his side of the Ho use was still in the reigns of govern ment, the last one was European borrowi ng and that's the last borr owing that was undertaken by the province of Manitoba. I expect that there wi ll be some furthe r borr owi ng, primari ly with regard to continuing the obligations to the Crown corporat ions, specifically Ma nitoba Hydro. When that takes place, it will be annou nced. MR. CHERNIAK: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance. Does he state that the Provi ncial Auditor has given figures of per capita debts in the provi nce and well in excess of $3,000 each, or is that, indeed, a sta tement made by his own leader on the election campaign platfor ms? MR. CRAIK: Mr. Speaker, the amount of three billion, four hundred and some million dollars is contained in the statement which was mailed out to the Member for St. Jo hns, along with all the other members of the Legislature, and along with Pu blic Accounts. MR. SPEAKER: The Honou rable Member for The Pas. MR. RON McBRYDE: Mr.

Speaker, I'd like to address a to the minister responsible for the health and safety in the qu estion workplace legislation. I wonder if the minister could tell us if the Mini ng Safety Conference originally scheduled for last week, if that's been rescheduled, and if so, when. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Minister of Labour. MRS. PRICE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to infor m you that the Mining Safety Conf erence has been rescheduled for Febr uary lst through the 3rd. MR. McBRYDE: Mr . Speaker, I wonder if the minister could tell us which government ministers will be attending this conference .. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honou rable - has the member another question? MR. McBRYDE: I guess I'd better have, Mr.nSpeaker. Could the minister tell us how many fatal accidents have occurred in the mining industry in Manitoba over the past year? MRS. PRICE: Could you repeat the question, please? I didn't hear you on the first one, either. MR.nMcBRVDE: The first question I asked was which of the government ministers are going to be attending the Mining Safety Seminar? MRS. PRICE: The meeting was jus t rescheduled yesterday, but to date, as far as I know, I and my deputy minister wi ll be going, and I don't know other than that.

As I say, it was ju st rescheduled yesterday. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for The Pas, with a final supplementary. MR. McBRYDE: A final sup plementary, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the minister has the information as to how many fatal accidents have occurred in the mining industry in Manitoba this year. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for Transcona. 87

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 MR. PARASIUK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My qu estion is directed to the Fi nance Min ister. I ju st wanted to clarify this - he ju st told my honourable colleague from St. Johns that the auditor put out this interim statement. Is that correct? Did he or other members of the government give any instru ctions to the auditor with regard to format of this statement or substance? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Fina nce. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, in reply to the member's qu estion, the auditor's statement was to the September 30th, 1977 cut-off date, and I think the member knows that if he reads the information that was supplied to him. It was distributed to the members of the Legislature in advance of the public annou ncement. The projections to the end of the current year, March 31, 1978, are the projections from the end of September.

The remaining six months of the year natur ally can't audited because an auditor is an after-the-fact audit, so the projections from September 30th on to the end of the year are produced by the Departm ent of Fi nance, and the reply to the question I gave, the last question of the member for St. Johns, he'll find that the figure is contained about four pages back in this booklet that was distributed to him, and again the exact amount of the per capita, gross per capita, debt, as I've said, was 3.470 billion, etc., working out to an approx imate per capita debt of $3,434 per man, woman, and child in Man itoba. MR.

SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for Transcona, with a supplementary. MR. PARASIUK: Yes, I'll repeat my first qu estion, Mr. Speaker, because the Fi nanceMinister didn't answer it. I asked him if he, or any other members of the government, gave any instru ctions to the auditor with respect to format or substance. MR. CRAIK: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think as a person who has spent a good deal of his life working in the government, that the Member for Transcona knows that nobody instructs the Audit or of Manitoba what to do. MR. SPEAKER: The Ho nourable Member for Transcona, with a final supplementary. MR.

PARASIUK: Well, then, as the interesting thing and I'll wait for the Publi c Accounts Committee but I'll ask him to ask the Aud itor whether, in fact, he instructed the Audit or to present a statement which bears no relatio nship on the first pages to the statements that he has presented to the Ho use in the past, with respect to format. MR. CRAIK: Mr.

Speaker, my reply to him is that he has the fu ll right as a member of the Legislature to speak directly to the Audit or and you will perha ps ask some of the senior colleagues on his side of the Ho use that the Auditor is available to the members of the Legislature. If he wishes to query him on the procedures, he's qu ite welco me to do it. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Br andon East. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a qu estion of the First Min ister with regard to air service.

I wou ld like to know whether the First Minister can tell us whether he or any of his colleagues have undertaken any efforts to bring about air service to the city of Br andon. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable First Min ister. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, that is one of a number of unfin ished items that my honourable fr iends left, along with a tremendous fina ncial mess that we're looki ng at right now. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speak er, in case the honourable First Minister is not aware, hearings are aboutto begin, in a matter of weeks.

As a matter of fact, on Ja nuary 16th the Air Transport Committee is to hear applications for air service to Brandon. My question is, inasmuch as the leader of the Conservative party during the campaign stated that he believed in first-class service, could he explain how he is going to bring about fir st-class service, meaning jet service, to the city of Brandon, because that was a promise he made to the people of Brandon, and I'd like him to tell us now how he's going to bring about first-class service to the city of Br andon. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I well remember the context of the particular comment.

My honourable fr iend was suggesting he was satisfied with second-class service and coming from a second-class government we know why. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, the Ho nourable First Minister is incorrect. We were talking about third level air service- he doesn't know his technicalities. And he should tal k to his colleague, the Minister of Consumer and Cor porate Affairs. Mr. Speaker, I and the people of the city of Brandon are not satisfied with your sarcastic, arrogant remark s. We want ... MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Order, please. Order, please. Order, please. I'll thank the Member 88

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 for Brandon East for finally recognizing the Chair. The next question is from the Honourable Member for Burrows. M.R: BEN HANUSCHU�: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Honourable the First M. m1ster. Could he advise the Hc;>us� under what authority the Civil Service Commission is dealing with .fT!atters related to th� ter� mat1on of employment of three deputy ministers? Is it under some prov1s1on of the Act of which I m unaware or pursuant to some directive from government? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR'. �YON: Mr.

Speake�, �'m s.ure that my honourable friend will be unaware of many of the prov1s1ons of that act, but 1t 1s being dealt with by the Civil Service Commission. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Selkirk. M.R .. PAWLEY: . Mr. Spe�ker, a question to the Honourable the Attorney-General. Is he prepared at this time to provide me with an answer to the question which he took as notice on November 25th page 16, dealing with the St. Boniface Family Court project? ' MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. MR. MERCIER: The answer is no, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Transcona. MR.

PARASIUK: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the First Minister, in relation to the question asked by my colleague from Burrows. Yesterday he indicated that if we wanted answers maybe we should phone one of the former deputy ministers. I did that. I find out that the matter isn't routinely being handled by the Civil Service Commission ... MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Order, please. If the Honourable Member for Transcona has a question I would ask him to ask it. MR. PARASIUK: The question is ... routinely handled by the Civil Service Commission?

Since no one has wound up the First Minister so that he could answer the questions or plug in the tape recorder I would like to tell him that I phoned up the person yesterday and it's been back in the Executive Council and left there. MR. SPEAKER: The Member for Brandon East. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question of theMinistero f Industry and Commerce. I would like him to advise us of exactly what industries the various investors that he's spoken to recently are particularly interested in.

In the Tribune of Friday, November 1 Bth, the Minister is quoted as saying: "That private individuals with millions of dollars has spoken to the provincial government about investing in Manitoba because the business climate has changed. " I wonder if the honourable member could explain what industry specifically these people are interested in? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for The Pas. Has the Member for Brandon East a supplementary question? MR. EVANS: I have a supplementary question to the first one that was not answered.

I would like to know then, what is the source of this capital supply that is coming into free Manitoba? It said in this

article that the minister did not name companies or individuals with private investment capital, but said that they "came from islands which are tax shelters in countries whose citizens are buying Canadian farmland. " Could he please advise the House now exactly where this money is coming from and how it may be utilized? Is it just simply to buy Canadian or Manitoba farmland? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. HON. ROBERT (Bob) BANMAN (La Verendrye): First of all, Mr.

Speaker, in reply to the question from the Member for Brandon East, I will make announcements when I have announcements to make, and furthermore that I have indicated and it is common knowledge in many of the business communities in the province of Manitoba that the climate has changed. There are people once again looking actively at investing in Manitoba and if the member would check his own figures that the department had provided to him in the last number of years about the declining investment in this province he would have realized and acted on some of them. A MEMBER: Right. 89

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Order, please. I want to inform the House that there is only about one minute left in the question period. The Hon ourable Member for Br andon East. MR. EVANS: A supplementary then. I again relate to his statement that they come from islands which are tax shelters. Is he therefore suggesting in his encouragement of investment capital in this province that he is about to suggest to his col leagues or about to offer these would-be entrepreneurs that Man itoba would be a tax shelter for these people? ORDERS OF THE DAY - THRONE SPEECH DEBATE MR.

SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Ho nourable Member for Pembins and the amendment thereto moved by the Hon ourable Leader of the Opposition. At closing time last night the Ho nourable Member tor St. Jo hns had 17 minutes left. MR. CHERNIACK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope the 17 minutes includes the time taken by the Hon ourable the Minister of Publi c Works during last night's debate, because Mr.

Speaker, I think that you are going to have a difficul t job in carrying out your functions when you have to deal with people such as the Hon ourable Min ister of Publi c Works who you recall gave your predecessor a pretty hard time as well. In the light of the problems that you are going to have, I do want to wish you well. I know that we have had exchanges between us which would indicate a lack of rap port in con nection with policy and philosophy, but I do feel that you have been one of the most conscientious members in opposition and I believe you will be a conscientious person in the Chair.

For that I want to try to support you in your efforts and urge you to be impartial as you intend to be, and I want to support you in that. I want also to recognize the role that will be played by the Deputy Speaker, the Honourable Member for Ro blin. I would like to offer him the same co-operation that I offer you but I will have to withhold that until I find out whether or not he is prepared at long last to honour the com mitment he gave to the last Legislature to produce certa in ... MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for Robl in. MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, on a Poin t of Pr ivilege.

May I inform the Member for St. Johns that I will give that information as soon as the Minister of Agriculture gives me the Order of Retur n. It 's been held up for some three years. MR. SPEAKER: The Hon ourable Member for St. Johns. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr . Speaker, I am surprised that the Ho use Leader hasn't got up and chastised the Honourable Member for Robl in for improperly rising and to indicate to him that if he can not talk to his own col league he has problems. Bu t, Mr.

Speaker, to find that he is now hiding behind some other matter in order not to reveal a foolish statement or a deliberate misrepresentation compounds the position in which he put himself last year. Last year he - made the statement, Mr. Speaker, andyou know I started out this morning in a complimentary way in offering a sense of co-operation to people put in your position and I don't withdraw it from you, Mr. Speaker, but by golly, Mr. Speaker, if the Member for Roblin is going to continue to deny his own promise - and I will remind you, Mr. Speaker, I think I have the page reference in Hansard, yes I do.

Page 1622 on April 6th of last year, the Hon ourable Member for Robl in spoke and said that there was an increase in his Hydro bill from $ 10 .00 to $50.00 implying that that was the normal rate increase which he was suffe ring. He was called on that. He promised to bring his bills, he did not do so. He had excu ses then, he's looki ng for excuses now. He is not facing up to his obligations to be an honourable member of this House or a proper representative for the constituency which has sent him here. Mr.

Speaker, I must remind him again, and I will again, that he has made a promise to prove a statement which was so blatantly wrong and he is conti nuing to smile sweetly where he sits and to do nothing about it. Mr. Speaker, in spite of the fact that the Member for Roblin has contin ued to indicate a lack of respect for this Ho use and for his own integrity, I do want to welcome his col leagues who are new to this Ho use. I have met very few of them.

I'm looking forward to opportunities when we will meet on other occasions to get to know each other better because there can be a camaraderie in this House amongst people of different political motivation and one should start with an effort to try and understand each other and know each other and wor k together. I want to wish well the predecessors of the new members in this Ho use some of whom, of their own volition and others of the people's volition, are no longer with us. I think they have all served well and are entitled to be remembered in that respect.

I want also to welcome the new ministers, and when I say new I mean not only ministers who are newly on the jo b but also those who are thrown into the position of being members of the Treasury Branch without having had the exper ience in opposition. I want to indicate to them that they do have a diffic ult job. It will not be made easier in the House and it is one which they will have to learn as they 90

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 go along. I wish them good health in doing so. I want also on my part to welcome the three new members to our caucus and in doing so not only to welcome the new members but to give tribute to the people whom they have replaced. The Member for Wellington has joined us replacing Phillip Peterson with whom I had the privilege to sit as an elected member back in 19 50 and with whom I had a long-lasting and, for my part, a very enjoyable experience.

The Member for Transcona whom I welcome as well, has replaced the former leader of this party under whom I served as deputy leader and for whom I have a great regard and who will certainly be missed in this Chamber although if one ever stops for a moment and lets the silence permit the reverberations of the echoes in this Chamber, one can still hear the former leader of the NDP, Russ Paulley, giving one of his speeches and I am sure many of us will reflect with nostalgia on it. The Member for Churchill has joined us.

He will be a real asset to our caucus but I have to say that he has replaced a person who has also shown a genuine interest in people, a concern about people and he will be missed. As mayor of Churchill, I suppose the treasury bench will be seeing him more often than we will because there is every indication already that the Conservative government is going to hamper the growth and development of various municipal entities and I know now that the mayor of Churchill, Mayor Les Osland, will not let things go by without a struggle. I want also, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate the mover and seconder of this motion.

I must comment that the Member for St. Matthews who has shown such a great concern for senior citizens will soon be voting or\ legislation which will do everything but benefit the people for whom he has expressed such concern. The indication that we had this morning of the dropping of the income tax, which is the second most progressive tax I have ever run into, is something that we have all forecast and that the people of Manitoba did not really comprehend, I believe.

The most progressive form of taxation I can think of is succession duty, the taxing of people who have done nothing to earn the money which they have inherited to which they fell heir without any effort on their parts. They didn't work for it; they didn't sweat for it; they didn't save for it; it is just a windfall that came to them and governments of the western countries have long recognized that an inheritance tax is the most justifiable and progressive taxation. Now the second one is progressive income tax and how remarkable it is, Mr.

Speaker, that we know that in the first session of the NDP government in 1969, we removed the invidious flat premium medicare tax and replaced it with an increase in the most progressive form of taxation and typically the Conservatives in their first opportunity are reversing that very process.

It should be known, it should be recognized, that what we predicted would happen did just as it was predictable that the new Premier of this province would make arrogant statements about the gross debt and I can credit the Minister of Finance today for saying "gross debt " because he has learned already as his own leader must know that when you have self-sustaining debt, it is false to attempt to declare that as being a burden on people who are the normal taxpayers of this province.

I cannot help but commenting that the Question Period today, as yesterday, indicated an attitude on the part of government which will develop and grow and that is a disdain for the parliamentary function. To see some of the ministers sit back and not respond to questions and the leader of the government is the one who has shown the greatest arrogance in continuing to sit and to mouth responses in an insulting manner but not to reply honestly to a question which has been directed to· him.

I think that all of this is an indication of the next four years to come and all of the Throne Speech itself, and the legislation brought forward, is a clear indication of the allegiance and loyalty of the Progressive Conservative Party. lt8s concern is and will always be to those who are taking advantage of a social and economic and tax system to their own personal advantage and with the least concern for those who are not capable of fighting this battle that the free enterprisers have promoted so strongly. So, Mr.

Speaker, it is clearly something we have to debate in the future and I think it is clear that members on this side will do their best to draw to the attention of the government and indeed, and more important, to the people of Manitoba, of what it is that Conservatives really mean for the ordinary citizen.

What it means so far is an increase in taxation; what it means so far is a benefit being given to the wealthy and to indicate it so strongly, we find that in a time when everyone knows that there is a reduction in income generally for all governments in Canada and for provincial governments in particular, that at such a time this government is now prepared to reduce the taxation of the wealthiest and in doing so, increase that burden of debt which was a great platform speech made constantly by the leader of the Conservative Party.

Increasing the burden which he himself has decried; increasing the burden on whom all of the taxpayers, when he divides the total debt by the number of taxpayers, clearly he is now increasing the taxation burden on people who are. least capable of handling it. That is truly what the Member for St.

Matthews has yet to learn that coming as he does from a district which represents people of lower than average income, he is now about to vote in favour of increasing the burden of taxation on them by reducing the burden of taxation on those who are best able to pay and that is what we have to realize is the proper philosophy and trend of the people in the Conservative Party. Mr.

Speaker, I want to comment again about the farce that t�ok place last nig�t "'."hen the government promoters, the Acting House Leader and the Premier attempted to indicate the frustration that they and the Attorney-General would have felt because they were a�ke� to follow �he proper procedure of this House. When they were a�ke� to go by the ru_les, t�ey ind1gna_ntl '>'. cried copious tears that their poor Attorney-General wasn t given an opportunity to introduce his bill. Mr. Speaker, I pointed out last night that he may not have known because he is not expected to know the 91

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 rules and how to wor k wit h them well, but his colleagues and especi ally the minister who sits immediately on his left, knew very well that the Attor ney-General had every opportun ity yesterday and the day before to speak on his legislation.

He had the opportun ity today and he has it in two minutes, in two minutes he has the right to stand up and respond on his intentions in relation to marital property and to do so in a way which is honoura ble and that is to respond to what has been said on this side of the Ho use rather than wait for the opportun ity to get up and read a prepared speech, which no doub t he has ready, on introduction of his bill.

He can do so right now, enter into the debate, respond to what has been said and show that what they acted out, the farce they acted out last night, was a sincere one and that is to indicate now and for all of the people of Manitoba, what are the intentions of the government on that kind of legislation which affects the lives of every person in Manitoba and where history has proven there is the greatest need of protection. I challenge him to do that and to show that he is indeed prepared to assume his responsibil ities as a member of this legislature and a member of the treasury bench. Mr.

Speaker, I would welcome an interruption by the Minister responsible for Housing and Renewal, either by way of a qu estion or a speech because he has that opportun ity right now. · MR. JOHNSTON: Would the honourable member permit a qu estion? MR. CHERNIACK8: Yes. MR. JOHNSTON: My question, Mr. Speaker, to the Member for St. Joh ns, are the members of this Ho use to be to ld what they are to say in the Throne Speech by the Member for St. Johns or are they allowed to speak on this Throne Speech freely as all the other members on the other side are? MR. CHERNIACK: Mr.

Speaker, in response to the qu estion asked by the honourable minister, let me tell him that I would not presume to have the right to instruct others how to speak but I cert ainly have the right to advise them on what is their role and how to do it. Why, the Ho use Leader today gave a lecture wh ich was completely out of place for him to do where he actually did instruct and demand, and even command others on how to behave. So let the member, the Min isterfor Ho using look only in front and to the left of him to find that person who is qu ite prepared to lecture others.

I am not, I am challenging and tha t's a very common parlimentary practice, challenging the Attor ney-General to respond to what has been said about the legislation which is, I believe, the only legislation he has to bring in this Hous e and if he doesn't want to do it nobody can force him to except possibly the Minister for Ho using Renewal who may have a greater influence than I have over the Attor ney General. MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion and the amendment thereto by the Hon ourable Leader of the Opposition. The Member for Bu rr ows. MR. HANUSCHAK: Mr.

Speaker, I was somewhat hesitant in rising because I had my eye on the Honou rable. the Attor ney-General, I thought perhaps he may have wanted to respond. However, in view of the fact that there is no response from the Attor ney-General, Mr. Speaker, then I would want to ... Bu t there has been a response, yes, there has been a response as you may have heard, Mr. Speaker, from the Min ister without ortfo lio, Ill , Ill yes. A MEMBER: IV, V. MR. HANUSCHAK: No, 11 1. If the honourable member had read the list of ministerial appointments he will find that in order of precedence he's Ill.

I believe the Hon ourable Ho use Leader is Minister without Po rtfo lio, I, the Minister responsible for Staff and Program Reduction, II , and the Ho nourable Minister responsible for Ho using, Ill. Firstly, Mr. Speaker, I wo uld like to congratulate you on your, and I believe the correct term is election as Speaker, I think that from time to time we hear the expression used, being appoi nted Speaker and I don't think that Speakers are appointed, I believe that the more proper expression is being elected.

There is a motion in the Ho use, properly moved and seconded and I suppose the motion could have been amended, there could have been a vote on it, it could ha ve been defeated, could have been debated and so forth. But the tact of the matter was that pursuant to the moving and seconding of that motion it was unanimo usly accepted by the Hous e.

Having had the experience, the privledge and experience, of having served this House as Speaker for two sessions some eight years ago, I know that on occasion your task will not be an easy one and it will indeed be a difficult and challenging one but it's a challenge that I'm sure you'll be able to meet extremely well. It brings to mind a comme nt made by a former Speaker of the Ho use of Commons, Mr. Speaker Lamoureux, who at one of our conf erences stated that in his opinion the secret of being a good Speaker is to know when not to enforce the rules and from observing you in action, Mr.

Speaker, for the past three days I sort of sensed that you do have that feeling for the proceedings of the Ho use; that you know when to roll with the punches, as it were, at what point to step in and bring honourable members of the Hous e back to the Orders of the Day and thus in that manner allow the busi ness ·Of the Ho use to proceed. I'm not 9oing to be one who will promise to make your task easy. I'm elected the member of the 92

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 Hous e and I'm elected to do a job and perfor m a certan fu nction. At this present time and for the next few years it's in the role of opposition and I intend to fulfil! my duties and respo nsibilities to the best of my ability as an opposition member and if from time to time such action on my part or that on the part of any of my colleagues should send you scurrying to the rul e book, well, so be it. Such is the democratic process and I suppose that is one of the occupational hazards. I suppose, Mr.

Speaker, that in this instance your jo b may even be a bit more diffic ult because from time to time we may, on this side of the Hous e, we may have to resort to the use of certa in four letter words, four letter words that perhaps weren't used with such great fr equency in the past and I'm not sure whether those words are unparlim entary according to Beauc hesne or not but this is something that you may want to check. There is one four letter word that we may be using from time to time, it begins with the letter T - Tory and I'm not sure ju st how you would look upon that.

There are a cou ple of othe r four letter words but I know that you will rule them out of order because it is not proper to refer to honourable members by name but from time to time we may make reference to another four letter word, Lyon, and another four letter word, Enns, so I know that this may make your job, your task somewhat more diffic ult.

I would want to congratula te the mover and the secon der of the Throne Speech for their contribution to this debate as has been indicated earlier by other honourable members and I think that all of us sense this, particularly those who had sat in the previous legislature that in the words of the mover, the Hon ourable Member for Pembi na, there were echoes and overtones at his predecessor, Mr. Henderson who represented his ri ding for the last eight years. And one could have shut his eyes and could have very easily imagined, without even seeing Mr.

Henderson, who happened to have been present in a loge at the time, but one would have thought, one would have imagined that his spirit, his presence is here in this Chamber somewhere. Mr. Speaker, I would want to wish the present occupants of the treasury bench well. I would want to welcome the newly elected members to this legislature, on both sides of the Hous e.

Those who had represented those ridings in the previous legislature I have known very well, some of whom for more than two or three legislatures, and I'm sure that all of us will remember them and their contribution and participation in this Hous e with fond memories and would welcome seeing them if at any time they should have the opportun ity to visit this Ch amber and at the same time extend their best wishes to their successors. You know, Mr. Spea ker, the purpose of this session is rather str ange. First we hear that there's a freeze imposed on cap ital expendi tures.

The further expansionary change or modification in programs and staff ing is also frozen and during during this freeze everything is under review. Everything is under review by the Minister without Port fol io, II. Everything is under review by him. And, well, on the surface it may have seemed as sort of a reasonable approach for a new govern ment to take. You know the new government could say well say, well, let's hold the phone and let's get our bear ings, find out where we're at and do an assessment of it, of our posit ion and then we will decide upon the course of action that we will take.

So, all of this is under review and everything be ing under review it also becomes somewhat apparent the nature of the answers given by members of the Treasury Ben ch. Most of the answ ers are rather, if we do receive any answers, but those that are offered most are rather vague and everyth ing is shrouded with the com ment that govern ment programs are under review and when the review is complete we'll have more defin ite, more precise answers. Well, as I've said, that's a fair enough position for a new government to take.

Bu t, wh ile this freeze is on programs are being reviewed, capital ex penditures are being reviewed, staff ing is being reviewed. The Leader of the Party says we must hold this partic ular session in which we're participating at the present time, to deal with certain matters. One, AIB legislation. Well, that's one issue and you' ve heard the response of this side of the Ho use to that. Deal with other legislation, which for the life of me none of us could understand the urgency about, or even the ju stificati on for it, but cert ainly not the urgency to deal with it. And, in fact, Mr.

Speaker, you will recall very well that even before this party became the govern ment, on the eve of becom ing the government, became the government on Mo nday, October 24, on the Saturday, October 22 wh ile the present First Min ister was still only leader of a political party, he was not swor n into office, took it upon himself to call in three deputy ministers and dismissed them, dismissed them, two days before he became the Prem ier. You know, Mr.

Sp.eaker, it is traditional and cus to mary in a change-over of govern ment for the outgoing members of government, of the outgoing govern ment, to brief and acqu aint their sue cessors with the lay of the land upon the ta keover of portfol io. Bu t, 93

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 it wou ld appear, Mr. Speaker, that in this instance, there cert ainly was no need for that type of liaison, for that type of meeting between two respective ministers because it was qu ite obvious that some body had already made up his mind on the course of action they're going to take.

I don't know who - whether it was the minister of each of the respective departments - in fact, I doub t very much whether it was the minister because from the publ icity that fo llowed, one would get the im pression that the ministers of the departm ents - Publi c Work s, Edu cation , what is the th ird one . A MEMBER: Agriculture. MR. HANUSCHAK: Agriculture - weren't even consu lted on this cha nge of deputy ministers. They weren't consu lted. In fact, when they were asked, you know what the com ment - we ll, they said, "Don't tal k to us. We had nothing to do with this .

It was the boss who made the decision." So, obviously, he had made a decision on the course of action that he could see his govern ment take and, in line with whatever ideas he had in mind, he felt that he ought to dismiss these three deputy ministers. So, either he had made up his mind - maybe, it was the people to the west of us, across Memorial Boule vard at Great West Life that made a decision as to what should be done with in this buil ding. We don't know. We don't know, Mr. Speaker, who had made that de cision.

Bu t, neverthel ess, a decision was made by somebody other than one of those three ministers - you know, Education, Agriculture, and Publi c Works - they had nothing to do with th is. Bu t the decision was made because it was felt that those three men did not fit into their plan and their program. No w, you know, Mr.

Speaker, I suppose one may say that in politics, in government that's fair ball, and it's true - with change of government, govern ments want senior personnel, particularly deputy ministers, of a type, of a calibre who would give effect to the philosophy, the program, the planks of the program, that the govern ment wishes to implement and ap points its deputy ministers accordi ngly. That's the way it's been in the democratic system for many, many decades and centuries. That's nothing new, Mr. Speaker. Bu t, it was the manner in which it was done, it was the man ner in which it was done.

Even before the leader of the Tory party, and I'm sorry if I have to use that four letter word, be came the First Min ister of this province, he took it upon himself - before he even had the power to fire them, because I doubt if he fired them on the Saturday, he coul dn't have , you know, he wasn't Premier - but obviously he gave them notice that come Mon day morning, after he walks out of the Lieutenant Governor's office, you know, that they're out of a job. It appears that this is what he must have told them. It was the manner in which it happened.

And, then, someth ing else that is even of greater concern to me, Mr. Speaker, and I do regret that the Hon ourable Minister of Education is not in his chair at the present time, because some of the com ments that I wish to make in my co ntribution to the debate on the Speech from the Throne do re late specifical ly to my former portfolio s. Ho wever, he is elsewhere, and I'm sure that if he should wish to he, as all of us, re ceive Hansard, and he'll be able to read my remarks in Ha nsard at some future time. You will recal l, Mr.

Speaker, because I made this publicly known some three weeks ago or so, I had wr itten to the Minis ter of Continuin g Education and Manpower and Min ister of Education - it was one and the same individual - sta ting that, in view of his govern ment's action, certa inly the action of his First Minister, re the deputy ministers, therefore I see no need for me to meet with him re the transfer of responsibility from one government to another, that it appeared qu ite evident that the government had made up its mind in what direction it's going to go and is determ ined to head in that direction, therefore the need for my meeting with him has become unnecessary.

Now, it so happened that the press, or one of the news papers, in report ing the co ntents of this le tter to the Ho nourable Minister of Continuing Education, had given the story the heading 94

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 that I am uncooper ative with my successor. Well, Mr . Speaker, it was the other way around. It wasn't I who was uncoop erative. It was my successor who was uncooper ative. It was he who refused to coop erate. No w, either he deliberately or his Fi rst Minister, you know in pulling the strings or in calling the shots, was uncoop erative, might take it upon himself, even before he became the government, to let the deputy minister go, which made it qu ite apparent that this government must have plans of its own, and therefore, there's no need for me to meet with them.

So, it was this government that was uncoop erative, not I. I was qu ite willing to coope rate, but the Honour able Minister of Conti nuing Edu cation either personally, or upon instructions from someone else - you know, person or persons unk nown, be it his Fir st Min ister or the corpor ation across the street, Great West Life - chose not to cooper ate with me. No w, I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that before the eighth day allotted to the debate of the Speech from the Throne, that we will have an opportun ity to hear from the Minister of Education , from the Minister of Conti nuing Education and Man power.

You may have noted, Mr . Speak er, in fact, I would th ink that it must be rather difficult for you during the Throne Speech debate to, you know, always have to direct your attention to this side of the Ho use. It must be a strain on one's neck muscles, rather than, you know, have the oppor tun ity to be able to look to both sides of the Ho use where there's, you know, equal partic ipation in the debate on the Speech from the Thr one from both sides.

Bu t, you will recal l that, you know, over the past few days, that the contribution to this debate from that side of the Ho use has been, you know, very, very minimal. There's only one - well, the mover and the secon der, of cour se - and then last night we heard from Minister without Por tfo lio II - (I nterjection) - well number two according to the order of precedence - there're three, and their precedence is in the order in which they're sworn in.

Now , as I've said, you know, the reason for calling this session, as first it was indicated, the main reason - to deal with the AIB legislation - I'll admit this is quite understandable. But , in the same breath, the government said a freeze on this, a freeze on that - everything is under re view - and while this review is proceeding, while this review is pro ceeding - bringing in legislation, removal of Gift and Estate tax, removal of Miner_al tax. This morning, Mr .

Speaker, you heard the Hono urable Minister of Fi nance make an announcement deal ing with fur ther income tax concessions, which you kno w as well as I do who will be the main beneficiaries of it - certainly not the person at the middle income level or below average income, but the person with the high income level will be the greater beneficiary. Why the rush with this legislation, partic ularly proceeding with this legislation, when the government itself, you know, has indicated that it doesn't really know what the beneficial fina ncial impact, if any, of their own legislation will be on the economy.

They say they don't know, they don't know. You know, they don't know whether the removal of the Pr ovincial Gift and Estate tax, whether that's going to attract investors to the province, retain investors, keep investors from moving out of the province - they don't know, but, nevertheless, they still proceed with legislation. But they do know this, Mr . Speaker. They do know that they can estimate fairly accurately the number of dollars short that the public Treasuries will be by the removal of Success ion duties and gift tax. They do know that, Mr. Speaker. They've indicated that.

They estimated the approximate amoun t. And they do know that to de liver a host of government programs, that those dollars will be needed. But those dollars aren't going to be there, Mr . Speaker, the number of dollars that succession duties and gift tax in the past have generated and which was estimated to generate in the fiscal year to come. Those dollars won't be there. So, then one of two things will have to happen, one of two things will have to happen. Either certain programs will have to be cu t, or a greater fina ncial bu rden be imposed upon someone else, and most likely upon those least able to pay. 95

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 Bu t the government has also said that by attract ing investment and keeping investors in the province that there will be, you know, indirect benefits, but they can't qu ite define those indirect benefits to the economy. Well, to find out what the in direct benefits may be, I thought, Mr. Speaker, that seeing that the government is so vague in defending and ju sti fying the legislations before us, I'll attempt to go and seek out some of the direct beneficiaries of this legislation and see how they feel about it.

You know, there must be some who will benefit from the estate tax legislation, the gift tax legislation, the two bills brought in by the government. Mr. Speaker, I went through my riding - I went all through Bu rrows constituency - and you know what, Mr. Speaker, I could n't find any beneficiaries of this legislation - not one, not one in Bu rrows constituency. Well, I thought, Bu rrows is only one of fifty-seven, I'll try some others. I went to the constituency of Point Douglas - I went looking there . You know how many I fo und?

None, none - (I nterjection) - well, I was going to go to Flin Fl on but it so happened that I ran into the Honour able Member for Flin Flon a couple of weeks ago - I asked him. He said he did the same thing in his riding - he went looking for some direct beneficiaries. And I asked him, "Ho w many did you find?" He says none - not one. Well, I tried the constituency of Logan - none. I tried the constituency of Win nipeg Centre. I was told, Mr .

Speaker, that once upon a time, yes, there was one born - I'm not sure whether he was born, but he claims to have been raised in Winn ipeg Centre - a likely beneficiary - a fellow by the name of Al Go lden was raised in Winnipeg Centre. He might be a beneficiary of this legislation, but, of cou rse, he's not living there.

In fact, conti nuing further in my search for direct beneficiaries of this legislation, I was told that there are probably very few of them around at this time of the year because they're all away in the Cari bbean, you know, being the winter season, yes, this is now time for their wi nter holiday. You know, in the summer time, you take a summer holiday, you take an autumn holiday, now it's time for the winter holiday. MR. LYON: ... : in Saskatchewan. That's where they don't pay it either. No w it's Mr . Bla keney. You're making the wrong speech. You've got your partyline mixed up. MR. HANUSC HAK: You know, Mr.

Speaker, I would hope too that before the Throne Speech debate ends, that we will hear from the Fir st Min ister, because, you know, we don't hear from other members of the treasury bench, only one from whom we heard yesterday and if . . . I don't know why, for what reason other members of the treasury bench don't participate in the Throne Speech Debate but I wo uld hope that at least he would partici pate in it. So, there we are, Mr . Speaker. The direct beneficiaries of this legislation ju st ... you know, I ju st haven't been able to find any and obviously they're not residents of my riding.

I don't know, perhaps they live in River Heights, maybe in Charleswood constituency, For t Ga rry, I don't know. Well perhaps honourable mem bers on that side of the Ho use would be good enough to assist me by identifying some of the direct benefic iaries of th eir legislation, because I wou ld like to get their views, get their reactions . B ut then I understand that if these people are away in the Cari bbean - winter hol idays in the Cari bbean are becoming increasingly expensive and no doub t they need all the help that they could get.

It 's no tun staying in the Hilton Hotel or Sheraton Ho tel if you have to worry about how you 're going to pay your $10 0 bucks a day for your suite. I appreciate that so they need all the help they could get and hence it asked that the legislation has to be retroactive to October 11 th . I I can well appreciate the government's thinking on that. But as I said at the outset, Mr . Speaker, that here is this government, uncertain as to future cou rse 96

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 of action in a variety of programs, but mixed in with this uncertainty, sometime prior to October 14 th, the Minister of Cont inuing Education and Man power was interviewed by two reporters, one from the newspaper at the Un iversity of Manitoba, the Manit oban, and the other from the Un iter, the students' newspaper at the Un iversity of Winnipeg; and you know, intentionally or unintentionally, I'm not sure which, butthe Honourable Minister of Cont inuing Educ ation and Man power did tip the government's hand as to what they proposed to do, as to the cou rse of action that they intend to pur sue.

Even though, as I have said, the eco nomic benefits of their legislation on the order paper now are uncertain, but one thing is certain, that if the economic benefits that they envisage not materialize, somebody will have to pay. Who will pay? Tho se least able to pay. Let a portion of the cost be borne by whom? By the students. By the students of our post-secondary institutions, our 30,000 students. The Honour able Minister of Education - you know, once again I do regret that he has not been able to re tur n to the Hous e.

He said, in response to a qu estion, "Do you think tuition at Manitoba universities or com mun ity colleges should remain at its present level?" And here's his response - and this appears in the No vember 14 th, 19 77 issue of the Manitoban. Hi s response says, "I would hope, Elaine," which I presume is the first name of one of the reporters, "that it could. Once again, economic factors are certainly going to have some bearing on what happens in that area.

I know that increased tuition fees will certainly prove a hardship to many students and I would be personally very much opposed to having to make that type of move or being part of that type of move, but there is an economic reality that may eventually force us into that position." No w, an economic reality that may force us into that position, Mr. Speaker. You know, Mr. Speaker, if you read this care full y, the Honour able Minister of Conti nuing Educ ation is saying much more than that.

This qu estion was related to, primarily, the reporters being from two universities, was related primarily to the university students . What the Minister of Conti nuing Edu cation is really saying ... that he is going to take upon himself the responsibility to encroach upon the authority, the independence of the boards of governors of the two universities and he's going to walk in, step in and say, "This is going to be the level of tuition fees that you fellows are going to charge ," and that is it. You will recall, Mr .

Speaker, and of cou rse in the last two legislatures, they spoke differently - they spoke out of both sides of their mouths when it came to talking about independence of boards of governors of universities. A MEMBER: Pol itical expediency. MR. HANUSCHAK: Whatever they felt was to their advantage.

In some instances they charged us with politic al interference; in other instances, when they felt that it wo uld be to their politic al advantage to come to the defence of a group of striking employees, they told us to interfere, they told us to give the universities more money, to tell the boards of governors to pay the employees what the employees were demanding and thus settle the wage dispute. You know, so they spoke out of both corners of their mouths at that time. A MEMBER: All four . MR. HANUSCHAK: And at this particular time, I suspect that they still intend to continue doing that .

But one thing is qui te certai n; that here the Minister of Conti nuing Education is stating that the economic reality may force him to dictate to the universities what level of fees they ought to charge their students. Well, Mr . Speaker, figure that out. Figur e that out. An increase of $50-$60 per student will cover approximately one-half the deficit that the mineral tax, gift and estate tax legislation will create. So you turn to the poor, the helpless student, let him pay, let him pay for the benefit of the person who today may be somewhere in the Cari bbean .

Let the student pay; let the student pay and cut out the waste. A MEMBER: Your waste, your waste, not the people's, you rs. MR. HANUSCHAK: I would be very anxious to see the First Minister's Minister without Port fol io II identify the waste that he's going to recommend that be cut out. -(lnt erjection)- Well, Mr . Speaker, I suppose if one wants to take that approach and have that type of an exchange, I could level the same remark at the honour able Ho use Leader too but I would choose not to. If he wants to engage in that type of dialogue, not unless he really provokes me, I would prefer to steer clear of it.

The Hon our able Minister of Conti nuing Education was asked, what is he going to do about the level of student aid? He says he can't give a definitive answer. He was asked when will he be able to give a definitive answer. Yes, the qu estion is, by when would you be able to give an answer? His answer is, "I really cou ldn't give you an exact date, sorry."You know, Mr. Speaker, what this means?

And students are anxious to know because I am sure, I am sure that on this very day, at this particular point in time, every minister over there and his department is in the process of preparing estimates for the forthco ming fiscal year. They must be. At least I will give them that much credit that they are preparing the estimates for the next session.

No w if the Ho nourable Min ister of Education cannot give a definit e answer on whether he anticipates the level of student aid to remain at the same level, be decreased, increased - I would suspect that there will be no change and with inflation, even if the level of student aid remains unchanged, the purchasing power will decrease so hence the level of assistance offered students will decrease. In fact, Mr. 97

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 Speaker, it would n't surprise me to see a cutback on the level of student aid because that too may be considered by that government as wasteful. That may be considered by them as wasteful. Then the Honour able Min ister of Cont inuing Education was asked about the building freeze and he said in reply that the whole point is tied so closely to the economic picture today and the employment pictu re today that in reality whether building should take place or not would have to be considered in light of the economic pictur e of the province and the employment pictu re.

Well, you know, his answer became a little bit ... as I read this, I cou ld see a faint glimmer of hope on the horizon, that he is looking at the employment side of the coin, that public capital expenditure must also take into account the em ployment situati on, the level of unemployment and so forth, maybe there's some hope here. So the newspaper reporter attempted to get him to elaborate on this point and said, "What is the tie between the building freeze and the unemployment situation?" Here's unemployment and you're imposing a build ing freeze. How do you relate one to the other?

So he says, "Oh, I think they're related very very closely with the economic situation and the employment situation in the province." I don't quite understand that answer and I am sure that the minister giving this answer isn't qu ite sure of what he said in that sentence. So he was asked again, "What is the exact link?" So, here's his response. I will leave this up to you, Mr. Speaker, to figure out what the honour able minister really means - and perhaps he may explain what he means at some time before the debate of the Speech from the Throne ends. Here's his response.

What is the exact link between the building freeze and the unemployment situation. He says, "Well, I think the amount of money that's available for post-secondary education and so on must vary with the economy. Un fortunately, education must compete with other programs for taxpayers' dollars. The choices are often diff icult." Mr.

Speaker, what the honour able minister means goodness only knows but I think that it's coming through fai rly clearly that whatever level of suppor t the universities may be expecting, whatever level of support the students may be expecting in the forthco ming year ju st won't be there, jus t won't be there. Then, Mr. Speaker, I could on to ... he was asked about the funding of research and this was rather amusing, Mr. Speaker, because when it comes to funding post-secondary research, I am sure you will recall - and you, Mr.

Speaker, you've been a member of this Ho use for a longer period of time than the Minister of Conti nuing Education - but the Minister of Conti nuing Education upon reviewing his estimates book , and he's had ample opportunity to do that, would have found that the bulk of the funds - and I do not wish to get into all the ramifications of some of the problems in the funding of the university research which occur- but the bulk of the suppor t for funding of university research comes from the federal coffers.

No w, there are certain spin-off expenditures whic h are created which the provinces have to pick up which creates a prob lem but we are not going to go into that. He assumes responsibil ity for that too. Why he wanted to assume the responsibility for it, I don't know. And so, Mr . Speaker, ... Oh, yes the interview went he was asked about affirmative action programs. You know, programs for the disadvantaged .

And this is what worries me when I make comment about letting a deputy minisiter go who was responsible, who was the architect of many of the affirmative action programs now in effect, programs designed to assist the disadvantaged, and I would like to know. I asked the honour able minister in my letter what the futur e of those programs is going to be because that was my prime concern . And he was asked, "Wou ld you be in favo ur of aff irmative action programs to get more members of minorities into Ii m ited enrolment facu I ties such as medicine or law.?" You know what his answer was?

"I wasn't aware that that was a great probl em." Mr. Speake.r, let him talk to the Minister of No rthern Affairs. Let him talk to the Minister of Health who is also responsible for Corrections. Let him talk to the Minister of Lab our who has a Women's Bur eau in her office wh ich we had set up .. Let him talk to them and find out whether there's a problem or not. But he takes the att itude there's no problem. No w, Mr .

Speaker, let him check his Estimates book and there he will find programs specifically designed to deal with the matter of affirmative action to assist the disadvantaged, and he says there's no problem. That too, Mr. Speaker, spells a death knell for those programs. That spells a death knell. If he says there's no problem then it follows from that as night follo ws day that there's going to be no funds for those programs, or if there will be any they will be substantially reduced because in his opinion there is no problem. That too, Mr.

Speaker, spells a death knell for a variety of programs designed to assist the disadvantaged, to assist students, STEP, our summer employment program and so forth. Now of cou rse when he talks about summer employment he is saying, well, that one reason why there are fewer students from the lower socio-economic classes than the higher attending university is because the parents in lower socio-economic groups do not give the students that type of urging and encouragement. Mr .

Speaker, I wo uld dare, I would challenge the Honour able Minister of Conti nuing Education to go to the Bu rrows constituency in which there are many many sons and daughters and grandchildren of the people living there who have gone through university at considerable sacrifice to themselves and their parents, and let him tell my constituents that they don't encourage their children to go to university, that they don't encou rage their children to seek a post- secondary education. Let him go there and make that same statement. · So in summing up, Mr .

Speaker, in the fraction of a minute that I have remaining, it has become very very apparent that the road in which this government is heading, that the direction in which the Min ister of Conti nuing Education is heading is to reduce, to cut down, to eliminate programs designed to assist the disadvantaged, programs designed to allow re-entry into the school system, programs designed to assist the students from a lower socio-economic cl asses, but instead encourage programs to assist the rich. 98

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 You know, Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Conti nuing Education wants to reduce education expenses, the best way is to go back to the so-called "good old days" when post-secondary institution !were open only to those who could afford to enr ol! their sons and daughters there and then those people pay their own way rather than devising programs to open the doors to all. That, Mr. Speaker, is my main concern about the next tour years. It isn't about the government but the effect it will have upon the unfortunate victims of the programs of this government that appear to be on the horizon.

MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honour able Member for Pembina and the amendment moved by the Hono urable Leader of the Opposition. Are you ready for the question on the amendment? The Honour able Member for Lac du Bonnet. MR. USKIW: Mr . Speaker, in rising to the debate on the Throne Speech I first of all wish to compliment you, Sir , on being appointed or elected by the Legislative Assembly to the highest office of the assembly. I believe honestly that you will carry out that fu nction in an unbiased manner. I certainly hope that that is going to be the case and I have no reason to doub t that wish.

I want to co mpliment, first of all, congratulate rather, all the people, the members who ha ve been re-elected. I want to congratula te also the new government on their election. I want to congratulate new members of the Legislative Assembly. I was somewhat intrigued, Mr . Speaker, by the introductor y remarks by the mover and seconder of the speech in reply to the Speech from the Thr one. I want to congratula te them on a fine delivery of their contri bution. I was somewhat amused however because the mover reminded me so much of the past Member for Pembina.

It was as if there wasn't a change in personality wha tever. It was so obvious and the contr adictions were also very much the same, Mr. Speaker, and that was most amusing to find that there are at least a number of people emanating out of Pembina that have the same style and the same contrad ictions with in their delivery. I refer specifically, Mr .

Speaker, to the various points that were made by the mover and that was that they were very much free enterprisers in philosophy but at the same time seemed to not fully appreciate the fact that with in their constituency there is so much public enterprise which they do not want to let go as well. So they are a bit in a quandry but it is obvious to me, Mr . Speaker, that it the government was to pursue a policy, a withd rawal of public support from that constituency, that they would be objecting as strenuously as any other member of the Le gislative Assembly would if it happened in their particular area.

So those are similarities as between the new Memb er for Pembina and indeed the outgo ing member. Yes, I am advised, Mr . Speaker, that in that particu lar constituency they were the second highest of all the provincial employment grants of all constituencies in Manitoba. That indicates their free enterprise approach very well, Mr. Speaker. I was more confused, however, by the comments of the seconder of the speech in reply because it was truly an NDP speech, Mr. Speaker.

Virtually all of the thi ngs that he said and urged, commented upon, were really NDP policy for some numb er of years, policies that have already been enacted. He was simply suggesting that we should continue on with such programs. I wo uld have to conclud e that perhaps he was running for the wrong political party given that he has such strong views on the social questions that he introduced in his speech. Perhaps maybe he is doing something else, Mr . Speaker, which is typical of Conservatives and that he, too, has more than one answer to the same qu estion depending on whom he is speaking with.

Perhaps maybe that is the explanation because one wou ld have to recognize that one cou ldn't talk too much about the need to get government out of the affairs of people if one was talking to the people in City Centre, in St. Matthews, because there is a problem that does require a great deal of public attention. So in recognition of that I have to conclude that perhaps the Member for St. Matthews is saying the right thi ngs at the right time but basically is of a very right-wing Conservative philosophy but dare not allow notice of it. Perhaps that is the explanation, Mr. Speaker.

I think time will determine that for us because people who take on that posture have to maintain that approach. The big lie technique only works for so long and you have to keep on doing it and you have to hope that people will not catch on .. . A MEMBER: ... It got to be pretty close .. . MR. USKIW: Pr etty close but not qu ite over the line, I appreciate that. MR. LYON: You are usually right over it but it's pretty close. MR. USKIW: You have to maintain that posture and hope that someone doesn't catch you in the act and that's diff icult to do for a prolonged period of time.

Therefore, I think that the Member for St. Matthews is going to have to re-think his position and perhaps even try to influence his own political party that there has to be a different approach taken with respect to the needs of ordinary people in Manit oba. It's no doubt in my mind, Mr. Speaker, that he is going to have a diff icult time in accomplishing that because it is obvious at this early stage in the life of a new government what the priorities are of the new government. But before I get into that aspect, Mr . Speaker, I would like to first of all remind 99

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 members th?t this go�ernment was not elected honestly. It was the most dishonest campaign that I have ever witn essed in all the years that I have partici pated in election campaigns in Manitoba. A MEMBER: You're an expert in dishonesty, you ought to know. MR. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, I have been very much involved in about 22election campaigns of which four were on my own behalf, Mr . Sp eaker, and I have never seen anything as cynical as that introduced by the Conservative Party in this election. As a matter of fact I think it is worth noting, Mr.

Speaker, that the New Democrats didn't have to withd raw their ads. I think that's worth noting. I think it's worth noting. They didn't have to wit hdraw their ads. They didn't have to have the media cover up for them as a result of those ads becoming an issue in the election campaign either and I think that is on the record. I would like to indicate jus t one or two examples of the blatant lies that were introduced into the campaign across the province. -(I nterjection)- I think, Mr.

Speaker, one of the most blatant ones and I wish I had a copy of it here, I don't have it - has to do with the advertisement that suggested to the people of Man itoba that in order to get premium free medicare, pharmacare, senior citizen housing, nursing home care, that they would have to vote P.C. That was the most blatant piece of advertising, comp letely false to the last letter of the ad, Mr. Speaker, because the people of Manitoba already had those things in good qua ntity, in good qu antity, not enough, but in good measure compared to any period in our history.

In fact a remarkable record in those fields has been achieved over the eight years of NOP administration. And yet they had the audacity to introduce that as a campaign platform that the Conservative Party would endorse. But to be more specific, Mr. Speaker, they talked about freeing the people of Manitoba. They talked about the need for more freedom for the people of Man itoba. And in my own particular constituency and in a number of others, because I ran into this in many parts of the province, Mr.

Speaker, they had these brochures of their candidates with a little piece of information about changes in regulations with respect to pou ltry grading. Mr. Speaker, it's interesting to see what they were trying to suggest to the people of Manitoba and I want to quo te from jus t one of these. It says here, "Fur thermore a recent directive from the Minister of Agricultur e has ordered that as of September 1 st, farmers are not allowed to sell off'dressed pou ltry. It is strange indeed that the so called government of the little man is now preventing the small farmer from selling direct to the small consumer.

This means that many small farmers will lose the clientele that they've built up over the years becaase of a reputation for good products. The government has simply taken away this aspect of their business." That's in a brochure that was mailed out to every household in my constituency and I don't know in how many other constituencies. Well, Mr . Speaker, what are the facts? They knew the facts.

They had access to the Information Services releases, to the newspaper stories that covered the new regulations and I think one has to remind him that those regulations were in effect for many many years, in Br andon, in Portage and in Winnipeg. The only change that took effect was that the rest of the province was now brou ght under those regulations which were passed by eithertheir government - which I didn't bother to look up or the government before theirs, way back in the Fifties, regulations that have been on the books for a long long time. If you go back fur ther, Mr .

Speaker, into researching this qu estion of health regulations, marketing regulations, grading regulations, you will find that the Conservative government in 19 60 passed a regulation which truly prohibits the sale of any pou ltry product without the inspection of a veterinarian to anyone. That has been on the books since 19 60, and it is sti II there, and to take issue with a regulation which simply states that as of September 1, anyone wanting to sell poultry or poultry products to commercial buyers that they must not do so unless they are graded.

To take issue with that and suggest that that is to deny the freedom of the farmer and the consumer to interact, for the farmer to sell directly to a consu mer, for ac onsu mert o buy from the farmer, was a complete false statement. MR. EINARSON: Tell the whole story, Sam. You're not tel ling it all. MR. USKIW: It is the whole story; it is the whole and complete story, Mr.

Speaker, and I am going to read into the record the news release that covered the change in the regulation, that effective September 1s t pou ltry and pou ltry produ cts offered for commercial sale, anywhere in Manitoba, must be graded in accordance with regulations under the Livestock and Livestock Pr oducts Act. Un til September 1s t, ungraded pou ltry and pou ltry products were permitted to be sold outside of Winnipeg, Br andon and Por tage la Prairie.

The request for the change came from the Br oiler Chicken Pr oducers' Ma rketing Boar d which said that outside of these three cities, it has been too easy to sell spent Leghorn hens as young three to four pou nd fryers. So it was really a consumer protection device having to do with commercial sales of poultry. No t sales as between farmers and consumers as has been suggested in the election material that was put out by the Conservative candidates. Of cou rse, I recall even receiving a letter from the Premier, the present Pr emier, during the cou rse of the campaign in that connection.

You know, I don't knew how anyone could describe that kind of posturing in an election campaign as anything other than the big lie technique because the regulations are publi cly filed; they are available to all citizens of Man itoba, certainly political people know where to reach public information on a day-to-day basis and how anyone could stoop to that 100

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 low measure in an effort to convince the people of Manitoba that there is something drastically wrong with the affairs of the province is beyond comprehension. Mr. Speaker. That is a bottom of the barrel approach to the political process. It's a characteristic of the Conservative Party of Manitoba. It's a characteristic of the present Premier who cares not for the facts ... A MEMBER: That's getting to the guts of it, isn't it? MR. USKIW: ... who cares not for the facts, Mr. Speaker, but who has an objective and is willing to achieve that objective, that goal, by any means possible.

The end justifies the means philosophy is really what we are talking about. A MEMBER: Socialism, that's socialism you're talking about. MR. USKIW: Not one, as the Member for St. Johns pointed out, smidgen of fact or truth need enter any statement made by a Conservative in Manitoba. That's really the posture and it's a sad commentary on our political process. But, Mr. Speaker, if that were all, it wouldn't even be that bad but, you know, they went to greater lengths in my particular riding.

In the last week of the campaign, they set up a telephone campaign committee and that committee was responsible to phone X number of people in the constituency telling them that if they don't change the government within the week, that farmers will not be able to sell poultry to consumers and they were phoning consumers telling them that you will not be able to buy your poultry from the farmer- this was a telephone campaign. A MEMBER: Those rumours spilled over into my riding. MR. USKIW: The former Attorney-General says those rumours spilled over into his riding. And then they went to another issue, Mr. Speaker.

They had a telephone campaign phoning pensioners telling them if they re-elect this government who was quickly eroding their freedoms that the pensioners are going to lose all of their assets if they participate in any of these programs and that was a campaign on the telephone, systematically. Mr. Speaker, that was obviously a very desperate move on the part of the Conservative election machine in the constituency of Lac du Bonnet. So, Mr. Speaker, it is not an exaggeration to suggest . . . A MEMBER: You're making a pretty gutsy speech, Sam. MR.

USKIW: . . . it is not an exaggeration at all to suggest that the present government ran a completely dishonest election campaign and that is the basis of their presence here this morning or this afternoon. Let's now talk about the character of the present government, Mr. Speaker, because I think I would want to kind of do a quick analysis of what that government looks like to me and to many Manitobans.

If you look at the posture of the Premier, I think it is very obvious that we are back to the old theories in terms of the economic conditions and the solutions to those conditions in the province of Manitoba and that is back to the theory which is so often referred to as the "trickle-down" theory, that all you have. to do is put a little money into the hands of those that already have too much and somehow through their spending and their program in the private sector that enough will trickle down to the common people down below.

We're now back to that position which we abandoned in this province some eight years ago. I think one would characterize the Minister of Mines as not the Minister of Mines for the people of Manitoba but the minister representing the mining companies. I think that's how one would have to characterize that ministry. I think you would have to characterize the minister in charge of the Public Insurance Corporation as a minister responsible to the private insurance industry of Canada. I think that would be a fair assessment.

I think you would have to characterize the Minister of Public Works as a minister responsible to the private sector who will be providing the public needs in terms of office accommodation, etc. in the Conservative years ahead. There's no doubt in my mind that there may be a reduction, or at least a freeze, on government office space n the public sector. I'm not so sure that it will not spill over into the private sector on a greater scale than it. has been to date.

I think if you look at labour, I don't think you will find that you have a Minister ofLabour. l think you will find that you wi II have an assistant to the Department of Industry in the presence of theM inister of Labour. I think that's how you would characterize that ministry. With regard to Agriculture, Mr. Speaker, I would characterize Agriculture as a minister responsible to agra-biz. That would be a very good ... A MEMBER: That's better than having an irresponsible one which was what we had before. You f.leren't responsible to anybody. MR. USKIW: The former Attorney-General says, ... description.

So that is the character of our lresent government and I think that is obvious by the statements that have been made by the Premier 1imself and by a number of his Cabinet ministers. By the way, some of the statements are so 101 r w p h

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 contradictory it's very diff icult to fol low from one day to the next what it is that they are trying to say. But whatever it is, Mr . Speaker, I think it's fair to say that in the political process that no government stays in power forever and governments do change for one reason or another, and sometimes for no other reason than to have a change so we have to accept that as a reality of public life, as a reality of the pol itical system in which we live, and that is something that I am certain no member in the legislatur e wo uld want to change.

So, so be it, and we now have to move along with respect to programs for the people of Manitoba that will increase, improve, their standard of living as a whole. It will be interesting to see, Mr. Speaker, in the years ahead whether the trickle -down theory which was tried so many times over the years, over the 10 0 years of our history, whether in fact there is anything new in that theory that is going to bring better results in the three orf our years ahead than they have done in the past 10 0 years of our history. I don't believe that too much is going to change.

You know, I was very amused about a week ago when I read a statement given to the media by the Pr emier with respect to a works program to somehow alleviate to some degree the increasing unemployment situation in Manitoba. His off the-cuff response to that was that that's what you have unemployment insurance for, is to look after those people who don't have jobs. So, when you tighten down the economy you provide unemployment insurance and, of cou rse, if there isn't unemployment insurance you then have welfare, then you have welfare.

But you know, on the other side of the ledger they tighten up the UIC regulations and the welfare regulations at the same time, and so it puts some people in a very impossible situa tion. I suppose, I suppose that's an extension of Co nservative freedom because they would argue that one has a right to go without; they would argue that one has a right not to have three meals a day, that would be a basic human freedom in terms of Co nservative philosophy. Well, it is something that I don't think the people of Man itoba, Mr.

Speaker, are going to accept and I think that that particu lar position is going to haunt the Conservative government before too long. No w, I want to reflect for a moment, Mr . Speaker, on the posture of the Pr emier-elect, the government-elect so to speak, prior to the swearing-in ceremonies and you will recall, Mr. Speaker, that I took objection to attending those ceremonies. -(l nterjection)-Well, the Memberfor Br andon West says he didn't notice.

Perhaps he didn't notice, but I wou ld like to point out to him that it was a disappointment to me that conditions were such that it made it impossible for me to witness the swearing in of our new government because, after all, that government was elected by the largest single block of voters, and I think that it would have been nice to partici pate. You know, Mr.

Speaker, whenever there is a change in government it is always reasonable to expect that the out going government shou ld, in some way, brief the new ministry, department by department, at least in part to the extent that they have I have a desire to be briefed, and that that would allow for a much smoother transition. Perhaps maybe they didn't want to be briefed, I don't know. But in any event, Mr.

Speaker, under our parl iamentary system, the tradition has been, the practice has been over the years, that really it wasn't necessary to do that at the ministerial level but certainly at the deputy minister level, that usually deputy ministers carry on after a government is gone and are in a position to advise the new government, the new minister, as to what is going on in each respective department and, of cour se, that par ticular minister can assume to carry on or to change what is going on in those departments. Bu t, at least the transition is rather smooth in that sense in that there is continu ity.

Well, you know, with the arrogance of our Pr emier there was no way he was going to bring about a smooth transition from one government to another. He decided that perhaps he should fire some people before he was even in a legal position to fire them. That's really what he did, Mr. Speaker. A sad reflection on our democratic system, Mr . Speaker, a sad reflection on our democrat ic system. A Prem ier-elect calling in deputy ministers .. A MEMBER: A black day in the province. MR.

USKIW: ... giving them ten minutes, telling them to pack their because he didn't want them to serve him, not even for one second of his administration, once he was sworn in as Pr emier of the province. Mr. Speaker, that is arrogance supreme, there is no other way to explain, or express, or describe that action, that is arrogance supreme. The idea that there are human beings involved never entered the mind of the Fir st Minister or the Prem ier elect.

The idea that there has been dedicated service, on the part of these people, for a number of years for which one wo uld normally provide distinguished service awards didn't entert he mind of an arrogant government. No rmally, people who work in the senior positions of the government, they don't put in the routine seven hour day or seven and three-quarter, whatever it is - I think it's less than that now - they put in 15 , 18 hours a day, Mr. Speaker. They are entitled to some recognition, it should matter not to anyone what their politic al philosophy is.

The fact is that they were loyal servants to the government of the day and that is all that is important, that is all that is important. One doesn't expect, Mr. Speaker, that if there is a philosophical clash that they should remain in those positions. No one is suggesting that but surely they should have been given notice if there was no room in the system for them in a dignified way. That was not the posture of this government. This government wanted to reintroduce the lynch mob society, that's really what they wanted to do.

They wanted to put these people out in the public square on display and suggest to people that they throw stones at them. This is the attitude of this government, Mr . Speaker. They wanted to put these people on public display, having no regard for their feelings as human beings, for the feelings of their families. This is incredible, Mr. Speaker, it's 102

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 despicable. It's absolutely despicable, Mr. Speaker, to think that in our modern age a democratic society would behave in that fashion. Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't do that to my worst enemy. ! wouldn't do that, Mr. Speaker, to my worst enemy. Mr. Speaker, I thought that we had changed our mode of operation over the years. I thought that we had more humane instincts developed over the years than what has been displayed here in the transition of one government to another.

I don't think that anybody - I don't think that the new government could find fault with respect to either of those three deputy ministers who were fired on the basis of their performance, their professional performance. What fault could have they found with those three people who have dedicated several years into the public service? True, they were identified as to their political philosophy, but is the First Minister now suggesting to the people of Manitoba that if you identify yourself politically that you excommunicate yourself from job opportunities? Is that what he is saying?

Because that is what it amounts to, Mr. Speaker, that is essentially what it amounts to . Where is the sense of respect? Where is the sense of fair play? Where are the human rights that we are supposed to be so proud of? Mr. Speaker, I would hope that there was some way in which we could have a unanimous resolution of this Legislature which would take out of the history books this particular chapter, because it is of no relevance to the future. It is not the kind of thing that one would want to read and repeat, regardless of how many changes of government occur into the future. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I'm going to take a few moments to suggest to you- to the members of the House- that the deputy minister who served in Agriculture, one of the most dedicated individuals that one could find, philosophically opposite to my friends on the other side, and intellectually honest enough to say so, had no intention, Mr. Speaker, of working for that government. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, when we knew that there was going to be a change- and the peopl� of Manitoba gave us that indication very clearly - we learned that very early . . .

A MEMBER: When did you first suspect that that was going to happen, Sam, tell us? MR. USKIW: Mr. Speaker, when it became obvious .. . A MEMBER: I'll tell you when it happened. It happened on December 5th .. .. MR. USKIW: ... that there was going to be a change of administration. A MEMBER: December 5th, 1975. MR. USKIW: One of the first things that my deputy minister and I did was to sit down and discuss the orderly transition that is going to take place as between the outgoing Minister of Agriculture and the incoming one. And you know, there's a song that perhaps we should recall, Mr. Speaker.

A MEMBER: Sing it again, Sam. MR. USKIW: It says, "If I knew you were coming I'd have baked ac ake."Well, Mr. Speaker, we knew they were coming, and between my deputy and I, we had baked a cake. Yes, we had agreed, Mr. Speaker, that we would invite our new minister in, we would give him a day, two days, a week of briefing, whatever his wish was, in order to make the transition decent, smooth, and human. And my deputy minister said, "But, you know, Mr.

Minister, I don't intend to work for that government." My deputy minister said that "I would not work for a Conservative government because it would be a problem of conscience." There is no question about his dedication, philosophically. But he says, "If they want me to stay for a week or two, or a month, that's fine, I'll help them as long as it takes to bring about a reasonable transition." And, as we were discussing this, Mr.

Speaker, there was a phone call -I believe this was a Friday - a phone call from the office of the Premier-elect, who summoned my deputy minister for Saturday afternoon at 3:40p.m., I believe it was, to appear in his office. And, you 1 know, I said to my deputy, I said, "If it is what I think it is, then I want no

part in any ceremonies introducing the new Cabinet to the people of Manitoba. If that's the way in which they function, then 1 am not part of that." A MEMBER: Degrading. MR. USKIW: I would not participate in that kind of a situation. And, sure enough, Mr.

Speaker, the Premier-elect didn't appreciate the fact that it was a weekend- did not appreciate the fact that it was a weekend- did not appreciate the fact that people do make plans with their families perhaps for the weekend - perhaps they wanted to go out to the cottage, or wherever, but he had the audacity to summon three deputy ministers on a Saturday afternoon before he even had the legal right to do so. Supreme arrogance, Mr. Speaker, there are no other words for it. So, there is no question, Mr. Speaker, of decency, no question of basic human rights, there is no question of compassion.

Where is the compassion on the part od my friends opposite? · Mr. Speaker, I know of another incident involving a secretary who was given about twenty-five minutes to pack up her gear and get out of her office. And others who have suffered reductions in pay. don't know what this government is trying to prove, other than to satisfy some ego trip, and perhaps >orne constituency of theirs, that they are the masters of the province of Manitoba, and that they have i right to free-wheel and disregard all of the rights of man in the province of Manitoba. I don't believe 103 I s a

Tuesday, November 29, 1977 it was necessary at all to hang these people in the public square, Mr. Speaker, no more than it was necessary the other day - yesterday, Mr. Speaker - on the part of the Minister of Finance to make a public annou ncement that they have dened a loan to a cooperative in Manitoba. I don't know what purpose that served. I jus t don't know what pu rpose that served, Mr. Speaker. So, we have with us the lynch mob approach, and I believe, Mr. Speaker, that it is going to come back to haunt the First Min ister and his colleagues. I believe that the Publi c Service has views.

I don't believe there are many people in Man itoba that don't have a political viewpo int. I don't care who you employ - they all have their preferences, their philosophy. Some are stronger than others, but there are very few neutral types, and for the Fir st Min ister to suggest that somehow, with the introduction of new people that he brings in to replace these, that there is some air of neutrality. Mr. Speaker, that's got to be a joke - an absol ute hoax.

Is this present posture of the government suggesting to us that from here on there is no security in the Civil Service, that there is no means for the professional in the Service to aspire to greater heights in the system? Does it really mean that every time we have a change in government that we should have wholesale firi ngs? Is this really what we are on to, Mr . Speaker? Now, Mr . Speaker, I'm going to leave that one tor the moment and now deal with the fact that we have introduce d ... MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The member's time has elapsed.

Is there an indication from the Ho use that they would grant an extension? If not, I would ... then on the proposed motion of the ... MR. USKIW: Mr . Speaker, I wonder, on the Poin t of Order, I thought it was customary for the Sp eaker to give a five-minute warn ing in tte approach of his time of expiry. -(I nterjection)- No, he said it has elapsed - (I nterjection) - Oh, that's okay, that's okay. MR. SPEAKER: On the proposed motion of the Honour able Member for Pembina and the amendment proposed by the Honour able Fir st Min ister ... MR. USKIW: Mr.

Speaker, on the Point of Order, I do suggest, Sir , that usually the member that speaks is given notice as to the time that he has left five minutes before his time expires. No w, I'm wondering whether I can complete my remarks th is afternoon. MR. SPEAKER: For the benefit of the Member for Lac du Bon net, notice MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Speaker, it's 12 :30. was given to him.

Whether he chose to recognize it or not that is his business, but at the same time, perhaps if the member in the future wished to be interru pted in their speech, if all members require that then I will interrupt them five minutes before their time is up, but at the present time it is now 12:30 p.m. The Ho use is accord ingly adjourned and will stand adjourned until 2:30 p.m. this afternoon. 104

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-1-4
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 1st hansardpdf 4.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e519c5abb50986ce1f93ddaeae514edba48b6724

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