Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 32 (26th Legislature, 1st Session)

26-1-32

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly Of Manitoba DEBATES and - PROCEEDINGS Speaker. The Honourable A. W. Harrison Volume ID No. 32 July 23' 1959 lst Session, 26th Legislature Printed by R. S. Evans. Queen,s Printer for the Province of Manitoba, Winnipeg

INDEX Thursday, July 23rd, 1959 Bill 81, re Child Welfare Act (Mr. Lyon) Introduction ••.••..•... · ••••.• .•..• ..• ••• 1243 Bill 95, re Law of Property Act (Mr. Lyon) Introduction • • • . • • . • • • . • • • • . . • . • • • . • • 1243 Questions •• •• •••••••••••••••• •••••••• .•••• •••• •••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••••• 1243 Third Readings Bill 59, re M.H. S.A. (Mr. Johnson, Gimli): Mr. Paulley, Mr. Johnson (Gimli) Mr. Campbell.... 1244 . Mr. Ridley, Mr. Paulley • • • • • • • • • • . • • . . • . . • . . • . • • • • • . . . • . . . • . • . • . • • . • . . 1245 Mr.

Johnson (Gimli) •••••••. : . • . . . • • • • • • . . . • • • • . • • • • • • • • • . . . . • • . . .. • . . • . 1246 Mr. Orlikow .. •••••••• •.••..•• ...•. , • • . • • • . • • • • • . . • • • • • • . . . . • • . . • • . . • • 1247 Mr. Gray • . • . • • • . • • . . • . • • • • • • . • • • . . • . • • • • • . . • • • • • . . • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • . • . 1248 Bills 61 , 62, 65, 85 .. . . . •• • •• . . •• . .• . • • . •• .• .• . . .•• . . •• • • • ••• .• •• •• • • . .• . . .. . 1248 Bill 24, re Housing Elderly Persons (Mr. Johnson, Gimli) 2nd Reading • . . . . . . • . . • . 1248 Mr. Gray, Mr.

Orlikow.. .. .. ... .... .. ... . ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... . .. . .... 1249 Mr. Wright, Mr. Cowan •... .•.. .•. •••.•• .•••..• , • . . • • . . . . • . • . • . • • . • • • . 1250 Mr. Johnson (Gimli).. ..... .... .. ... .. . .... .. .. .... .... .. .. .... ...... .. . 1252 Committee of Supply Health and Public Welfare, Welfare Division, Statement, Mr.

Johnson (Gimli)...... 1254 Discussion of Statement ••..•••• •..• .•..•. ; ......•... , .••..••. · . • • • • • . . . • 1255 Social Allowances . • • • . . . • . . . • . . • . • . . . . • . • . • . • • . • • • • . • . • • • . • . . • . • . . • • • . 1260 Alcoholism Rehabilitation • . • . • • • • • • • • • • • . . • . . • • . . . • • • • • • • • • . • • • . • • • . • • • 1267 Industry and Commerce, statement, Mr.

Evans .•. ·••.• •• •.•• .••••..••. •.•.•..•.• 1275 Discussion of Statement.. .. .. .... .. . .. .. . ......... .. ....... .. ...... .. . .. . 1281 Travel and Publicity ... .. •.••• .•..•. ••••.•••.•.••••••...•. �. ... ... .. .. . 1291 Grant to Tr.ansportation Commission • • • • • . • . . • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . • • . • • • . . 1291 Salary Increases, Statement, Mr. Roblin . . . . . .. ... ·;. . . • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • . • . • • • • • • 1292

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2:30 o'clock, Thursday, July 23rd, 1959 Opening Prayer by Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Presenting Petitions Reading and Receiving Petitions. Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees Notice of Motion Introduction of Bi.Us HON, STERLING R. LYON (Attorney-General) (Fort Garry): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources that leave be given to introduce a Bill No. 81,

an Act to amend The Child Welfare Act No. 2, and that same be now received and read a first time. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and aiter a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources, that leave be given to introduce the Bill No. 95,

an Act to amend the Law of Property Act, and that the same be now received and read a first time. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and aiter a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. MR. T. P. IDLLHOUSE, Q. C. (Selkirk): Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to direct a few questions to the Honourable Minister of Public Works. The first quest ion is, how far does the government intend to proceed with the dividing strip on PTH No. 9from the Selkirk by-pass south? Do you want to answer each question as I ask it? HON. ERRICK F. WILLIS, Q.

C. (Minister of Agriculture and Immigration) (Turtle Mount ain): The strip is an experiment. We don't intend to proceed any further than now -- to try it now. We're going to paint it a bright color, see how it works out, and then decide whether we will continue it or not. MR. HILLHOUSE: A supplementary question then. Are you going to make openings in that .strip similar to the openings that you have on the double white strips now.

Coming along there this morning I noticed that some strips were about 1, OOO feet long and people on the east side of that highway who work in Winnipeg, have to travel north, to the first opening north in order to come south, and there's considerable hard feeling over it. So would it be your policy to make openings in those strips at the same places as your openings are now in the double white line? You have an opening opposite each dwelling house which has a crossing. MR.

WILLIS: I couldn't say in regard to each individual opening without examining i.t on the ground, but certainly there will be openings where openings are necessary. The hazard is increased greatly if we have openings in regard to each householder along the highway, and that is not possible -- but openings where openings are necessary. The member called to our attent' ion aJi additional opening about two weeks ago which was arranged for and in general we will just make them where necessary but there won't be any undue trouble as far as the householders are concerned.

But they will not each have one; safety is the first consideration, and we can't accommodate everyone, but saiety is the first consideration and where necessary we'll have openings. MR. HILLHOUSE: .••. Would the government then consider opening a temporary office down in that direction to receive complaints, because I don't consider that I'm under any obli gation to support goyernment policy. MR. WILLIS: ·As a member I've always thought that was what l was paid for. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day. MR. HILLHOUSE: And I'm responsible for it. MR. SPEAKER: Committee of the Whole House. HON. G.

JOHNSON, M.D. (Minister of Health and Public Welfare) (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into Committee to consider the following bills: No. 59; 61; 62; 65 and 85. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and aiter a voice vote declared the motion carried and requested the Honourable Member for st. Matthews to take the Chair. July 23rd, 1959 Page 1243

MR. CHAIRMAN: Bill No. 59. MR. A. R. PAULLEY (Leader of the CCF Party) (Radisson): Mr. Chairman, I would move that the Committee not consider Bill 59, but refer it back to the Committee on Law Amend ments due to the representations which were heard this morning. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Chairman, concerning Bill No. 59, I do not share the view of the Honourable Leader of the CCF Party.

I think it was made very abundantly clear by the speakers today that this is a very concrete proposal, that is the return of the Blue Cross money to those who should apply, that the administrative red tape, time and many difficulties which would be encountered in returning this money, as Blue Cross pointed out, would more than - would be a very ineffective move. I do feel too that, as the person and the Minister who brought down this Bill, that at all times the welfare of the people of the province has certainly been up permost in our minds.

There's no intent by this Bill to funnel monies into the coffers of the government. This is purely a concrete suggestion which, I understood, was agreed upon in principle by all those whom I called in to discuss this matter with. I feel the representations this morning only convinced me further that the method of distribution as outlined in this Bill, was the more preferable course to take. Certainly there is no one in the House who wants to deprive an individual who may wish their prorata share returned, this privilege; that is spelled out only too clearly.

And I feel myself very definitely that the Bill should be allowed to proceed through third reading. MR. D. L. CAMPBELL (Leader of the Opposition) (Lakeside): Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as this motion will probably be pressed to a vote, I would like to mention the stand that :i take personally with regard to it. I think that the Minister has stated quite correctly the situation as I see it. No. 1. I was in favour as the House was of having the Bill stand in Committee until the folks who wished to had the opportunity of making further representation. Those represent ations have been made.

I don't see any point in the Bill going back to Law Amendments Commit tee because apparently everyone who has wanted to make representation, has already done so. Now, I'm certainly not against all the discussion that the honourable members want to take

part in being allowed here, but now that we're in Committee of the Whole there can be a full discus sion, not only of all the members of Law ·Amendments Committee, but of all of those who are not members of Law Amendments Committee. And all the arugments that can be -- could be raised in the Committee can be raised here, discussed here, with an even fuller representation of the House than we have on that Committee.

So while I can appreciate the very valid reasons that the Honourable the Leader of the CCF Party had for asking the Bill to stand at the time he made that request, the arrangements have been made to accommodate that situation, the presentations have been made, they were gone into quite fully so far as representations were made, and we are now in the position I think for each and everyone of us to have our minds made up and discuss the matter to our hearts content here. And I'm all in favour of that being done.

And I'll be quite willing to state my own position on the merits of the Bill itself when that comes up, but I do not see any reason for it going back to Law Amendments Committee. MR . CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for the question? Mr. Chairman presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the amendment lost. MR. CHAIRMAN: Sections 1 (a)(c), (c i), (c ii). Sub-sec�on (B) 2, (2 a), (2 b), 3 - 4 - 5 -

Section 1 Pass.

Section 2 Pass. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to make a comment. We've gone through that so rapidly we haven't had time to present any formal amendments at this stage to the Bill. As you know, we worked until 1:00 o'clock in the Committee. I also realize that I don't think that we'd get very far with any further suggestions than was made this morning. So let it be clearly understood that that is the reason that I haven't raised any question on the various· items of the Bill. MR. CAMPBELL: Mr.

Chairman, I would wish to say only that while I realize the diffi culty of disposing of a fund of this kind and while I was quite in favour of the Bill as it was pas sed last year, I was in favour of it at that time because quite frankly the majority of the people on the Committee who had given considerable attention to this matter seemed to think that that was the best way, taking everybody's interest into account, to deal with the situation. Now, I must say quite frankly, that it seems to me that in the interval there have been Page 1244 July 23rd, 1959

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd.) .... some second thought given to this matter and in my opinion this is a better disposition than we had before. I know that it would be the feeling I think of most of us, perhaps all of us, that if it were reasonably possible to give the money back to the individ uals without a great deal of expense and difficulty, that. that would perhaps be theoretically the best thing to do with it. But having had considerable experience over quite a lot of years with the difficulty of getting that kind of a program implemented, I think that this is a good compro mise.

Now it's true that this does not seek out everyone and place the money that rightly belongs to that person in that person's hand. But on the other hand it certainly does make provision for anyone who sees the advertisement or has been interested in the discussions that have gor.e uh, who will take the trouble to apply for getting his or her money. And I think that that is a reason able disposition of the matter. I realize that there will be some who will not get their money.

I recall the situation that existed a good many years ago, 30 years ago, at the time of the winding up of the first Wheat Board, back at the time just following World War I. And even though the producers -- and farmers are not noted for having too much money as a rule, - even though the producers in that case held a certificate which had always been pointed out to them as being likely to be a valuable certificate, and every producer had had that certificate sent to him; they had that certificate to remind them of the necessity of asking for their money at the completion of the Wheat Board operations.

The fact was, and it turned out, that that certificate was worth almost 509 per bushel. But in spite of that a great many people in Mani toba and many more, as your would guess, in the other two prairie provinces, never cashed their certificates. And six years later, or thereabouts, there was standing in that fund a very large amount of money unallocated. And as some of the honourable members know, it was eventually paid out to the three diff erent governments, and the Wheat Board Money Trust Act was put on the statute books here in this province.

Manitoba's share being something in the neighborhood of $128, OOO. for something where the producers had held a certificate to remind them of the fact that they had a potential earning in that fund.

Now I realize that it's unlikely that all of the people, or even perhaps the largest portion of them, will claim the money that justly belongs to them, and I know that someone will feel some people will feel, that additional measures should be taken to search them out, but I think that the difficulty and expense of doing that outweighs the advantages of getting a reasonable compromise such as this, and I think that the Minister made a good effort to try and get the people interested to agree to a proposal that he was trying to make seems to me it's the best compromise that we could get under these circumstances and its better to get along with it.

MR. M. E. RIDLEY {Pembina): Mr. Chairman, I will be very pleased to see this Bill passed and go through as I have been a patient at the Cancer Clinic for the last four months at the Forlong Clinic in the General Hospital, and during that time I have received very good at tention. They put through there from one hundred to one hundred and ten patients a day and their facilities are just terrible. There is six booths in there in the one place, there's no place for people to change their clothes.

One Wednesday when I was there it was raining and the roof was leaking, but as far as the care you get from the nurses and the doctors it's just wonderful. I went out to pay my bill and they said there was no charge from the doctors,Dr. Israels and Dr. Walton and I am sure that we are doing a great service to the whole Province of Manitoba by giving them this money to help build their facilities so they can handle this run of people. And I'll be very pleased if this Bill is passed and I'm sure we're doing a great service to every one. MR . PAULLEY: Mr.

Chairman, I didn't intend to say anything further in connection with this Bill, but I don't want any misconception of the viewpoint taken by· those who were at the Law. Amendments Committee this morning or ourselves in respect of the treatment of cancer. We realize, and we've tried to impress upon this House not only this year, but in former years as well, without avail, the necessity for governmental action in respect of free treatment of can cer; Now the honourable member, who has just taken his seat, has informed us that he was in formed that the treatments that he has received were without cost to him.

Such does not apply to all of the citizens of the Province of Manitoba, and all that we have said in respect of this are two things. First of all, because of the fact that the monies that are being disposed of by this resolution were amassed as the result of the contributions made by members or subscribers to Blue Cross; that the basic principle should be that it should be returned to them and that was July 23rd, 1959 Page 1245

{Mr. Paulley, cont'd.) ••.• the basic principle in the Bill of last year. And secondly to that, while having no objection if deemed by the subscriber for this amount of money to go into cancer research, representation has been made and suggested that 1f that amount of money is done it should form the basis of free cancer treatment to all of the citizens of the Province of Manitoba. What is being done in this, and I have no objections to it at all, is to form the basis of the build ing of a building for Research of Cancer -- all right - research and treatment. The building is for research and treatment.

But the point raised is simply this, that having b_een done there is no provision for the free treatment of cancer. And we maintain and it has been maintained, that because this amount of money was subscribed by a relatively few or great, it doesn't matter, but they were done on an individual basis rather than a governmental basis, that if it goes into that field it should apply to all of the province on a free treatment basis. And secondly to that, the other objection in respect of the Bill, was the method of approach to the subscriber.

And when I spoke on this Bill on second reading I suggested that there would be no opposi tion whatsoever to a c ircular going to the known subscribers saying to them, "Now we would like this money to go in for the purposes of Cancer Research and Treatment" -- if you want me to add the words I have no objection to it at all - "But on the other hand if you would rather get your money back you can. " It was on the question of the approach, _that I raised the question. And l pointed out at that time, that in many instances in respect of advertisements in paper people just simply don't pay attention to them.

And we thought that a far better method would be the direct approach to the individual subscriber. And those were the objections that were raised to it. And we say this, and we say it again, and we1re going to continue to say it in this House as I mentioned before, that we're going to continue to press until this government or this province recognizes what in our opinion, is its responsibilities in respect of the treatment of cancer by the provision of free cancer treatment in the Prov ince of Manitoba. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): I want to answer two questions here.

One is the Cancer Founda tion and Research Foundation. As I tried to point out in my estimates the Cancer Foundation in Manitoba is the treatment-arm of cancer in the province and the Canadian Cancer Society through its national body collects the funds from across the Dominion for research and then funnels back the amounts of money required for research in this province from this central source, to .Pre vent duplication of Cancer Research.

In other words you don't want every city in the Dominion of Canada on the same research project across the land, you want a di.versification -- and our society has ample representation on that Research Committee. It was the intention and it was at all times made perfectly clear to those bodies whom I met with in trying to find some more suitable distribution for the Blue Cross Fund -- for some real purpose for them -- that this would be entirely in the use for the construction of a facility for the treatment of cancer.

Cer tainly the province would contribute the construction grants that were available through our fed eral grants in assisting the Cancer Foundation, or the Cancer Foundation to construct this facil ity. But here was something that everyone who had ever subcri.bed to Blue Cross could look to and say "This is what our money built in the City of Winnipeg - a Cancer Treatment Foundation- we got the thing going". The Government has told you that we are going to carry this in perpetu ity, we are largely, practically carrying that entire operation at this time, and will continue to do so.

In that factli.ty there will be radium, there will be the Cobalt bomb, there would be other high energy equipment for treating more diff icult and more inaccessible types of cancer. This was the whole object of this exercise. Here was something that the people of Manitoba could look on for many years to come as a very worthwhile effort.

It 1s the opinion of, by far, and only from this group have I heard the reservation that this is not the proper method of disposal; the people who are charged now with the responsibility of returning that money as indicated this morning very adequately in committee are most concerned as to the efficiency with which they will be able to do their job in the manner suggested by the Leader of the CCF Party. Now as far as free cancer treatment goes, I think that we should say a few words in this respect.

I indicated previously in my estimates that I did not feel, per se, the treatment of cancer should be any more diff erent as for free treatment as is hypertension. There is no one in the Province of Manitoba today who needs necessary cancer surgery that doesn't get that sur gery performed. There is no way this government or any government can pay for that in total. I also say this that here we're offering free radiation. This is a radiation centre _._ this is where medication for cancer will be given. Nitrogen and this whole array of new drugs that are Page 1246 July 23rd. 1959

(Mr. Johnson, (Gimli), cont'd.) .... now in use in leukemias and what not. All forms of it can be centralized in this place. There is no where else outside the Ci.ty of Winnipeg where radium and cobalt therapy and so on can be given. We cannot afford, as a province, to duplicate Cobalt bombs in every nook and cranny of this Province; we have to start centralizing these very high cost facilities.

I make a plea here that we bui.ld a Cancer Foundation Treatment Centre in the City of Win nipeg; that we use what monies from the Blue Cross that the people do not wish returned; that we the government, join with this group in constructing this facility; that we offer these servic es to the people of Manitoba and to the doctors of this Province, and this government is quite prepared, as I've said before and I'll say again, in our time, and before too long we hope, join with the professions in meeting the needs of those who cannot afford high cost medical operative care and so on.

None of us in this House want to see these people deprived of essential medical and surgical service. I agree -- this is what I want to get through -- I agree whole heartedly that we must meet this need. I also agree that in the past, and I think you will all have to agree with me, that the medical profession of this province has measured up to it in doing this ser vice. But people have come to their way of thinking that they no longer want to feel as second class citizens; they no longer want to feel that their doctor is doing them a big favour; they want to feel that they're paying their way.

And this is what we intend• to do with those people· who are not able to pay their way. We want to give them this independence of mind and spirit; but also we want to see this money properly used in the construction of this facility. We will go, we have said we will keep it in.perpetuity, and those aren't so many words, that's what we've reiterated over and over again, and we will. But, here was the problem, many, many representations came in; _there's got to be something concrete done with this money.

Everyone agreed this was a dandy idea, but it's just this disposal of funds that we're arguing about, what's the best way to do it? The best people in this field tell us the way this Act is written is probably the most practical. We're not trying to deprive the rights of anyone, but I think it's time we stood up and were counted on this Bi.11 now. I think let's get ahead with this job of building this cancer facility for the Province of Manitoba. (Hear! Hear!). MR . D. ORLIKOW (St.

John's): We on this side are certainly are not opposed to the build ing of all the facilities, which are needed for the treatment of cancer, and with the statement of the Minister that people don't want to be treated as second-class citizens; don't want somebody to give them charity in the treatment of cancer, we certainly couldn't agree more. This is not the issue about which the discussion is being held at all. The point, Mr. Chairman, is a simple one, this, the Blue Cross was a voluntary organization s_et up to help finance the hospital costs of the people who participated.

The assets of the Blue Cross belong to those people. I'm not opposed to the use of this money or any other money for the faciliti.es which are being proposed. I certainly have no intention of asking for my amount of money whether it's $1. 75 as has been suggested by the representatives of the Blue Cross, or $15. 00 as suggested by one of the labour representatives this morning. But the point is that a good number of people, who belong to Blue Cross, feel that this is their money and that they are entitled to get it back.

I've had more 'phone calls about this matter, than I think any other matter which has come up -- which I've had anything to do with in the last two or three years. People feel very strongly that this is their money and that they ought to be entitled to get it back. Now the Minister says and a repre sentative of the Blue Cross -- just a second -- the Minister said and a representative of the Blue Cross said this morning that they were doing everything possible to get it back to the people.

The representations made this morning, and I have to agree with them, were that ad vertising will not get the message across -- and if I listened correctly to the Leader of the Op position he agreed that you wouldn't get it all back -- and the representations made this morning and the suggestions we have made is that there ought to be a much more intensive attempt made to notify the subscribers of Blue Cross as to what their rights are.

I know it's difficult - I know it will cost money but I said this morning, and I say it again, it's no more difficult and no more expensive than it was when they had to notify the subscribers that the rates were going up, or that they would be cut off because they didn't meet the requirements any more. And this can. be done, and I think it should be done before the balance of the money is used for this purpose. For which we have no objection, we certainly support this or any other proposal to provide bet ter facilities for cancer treatment. July 23rd, 1959 Page 1247

MR. M. A. GRAY (Inkster): Mr. Chairman, just one minute. I expressed my views on second reading that all the money should go for cancer research or for cancer cures; and at that time I expressed my opinion that the public are human, and they will be no objection at all. And I venture to say, the little I know of human nature, and being a member of a prothetic race, I don't think you'll get -- you'll get less than a hundred, much less than a hundred who will ask for their money back.

I think the present Bill ..•. (Interjection) ... p1rdon? .... and so I, but this present Bill gives them the right to ask for it, and I think it's well worded, and anything we can do to save at least at least a human life, one human life, from this serious disease which is now prevailing -- and it . spreads, I think it's our duty to do it. MR. CHAIRMAN: Bill be reported -- Pass. Bills No. 61, 62, 65 and 85 were each read

section by

section and passed. MR. CHAIRMAN: Will the Committee rise and report. Call in the Speaker. MR . W. G. MARTIN (St. Matthews): The Committee of the Whole has considered Bills No. 59, 61, 62, 65 and 85 and directed me to report the same without amendment, and ask leave to sit again. MR. MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rob lin that the report of the Committee be received. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Minister of Agri culture that Bill No. 59 -

an Act to amend

an Act to Incorporate the Manitoba Hospital Service Association, be now read a third time and passed. Mr. Speaker presented the motion. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make one comment. We felt that we had a duty to perform in raising the objections as to the distribution of the funds of the Blue Cross. Having raised those objections I want to assur e the House we have no objections and are not going to oppose the third reading of this Bill. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. Bills No. 61, 62, 65 and 85 were each read a third . time and passed. ·MR.

SPEAKER: Adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the Honourable the Minister of Public Utilities for second reading of Bill No. 74. The Honourable Leader of the CCF. MR. PAULLEY; Mr. Speaker, I would beg the indulgence of the House to allow this to stand. MR. SPEAKER: Stand. Second reading of Bill No. 24. The Honourable the Minister of Health and Welfare. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, speaking to the-;- Oh, I beg to move seconded by the Hono-.irabletheMinister of Education that Bill No. 24,

an Act respecting Housing Accommo dation for Elderly Persons be now read a second time. Mr. Speaker presented the question. MR. JOHNSON: Mr. Speaker, in speaking to the principle of this Bill, I'd like to say that the principle of the Act itself is to provide greater provincial aid to elderly persons' housing in the light of our experience. There is a great need for such legislation in Manitoba today. In the past few months many organizations and municipalities have approached us concerning in creased government participation in this field of elderly persons' housing.

Now we have studied the problem quite thoroughly and have had numerous discussions with voluntary organizations, church groups, other charitable groups, welfare people, municipal men and the Age and Oppor tunity Bureau of Manitoba. We have seen other western provinces going ahead by leaps and bounds. I feel mainly because of good salesmanship and by more generous grants structure. Organizations and municipalities want to build hostels without the set proportions of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation regulations.

This Bill provides increased grants for diversi fied programs for elderly persons' housing units and hostel accommodation, single units, double units and certain facilities which may be shared are provided for. A great need for more single accommodation is required, and the grants are realistic by modern day housing costs.

In respect to hostels, the restrictions of the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation have prevented the development of this type of accommodation to date, and this Bill lifts such restrictions by providing for Provincial Government guarantee of loans for such accommodation; and again, diversifies the program by providing that such hostels are not tied to a housing Page 1248 July 23rd, .1959

(Mr. Johnson, cont'd.) ...• development. In the hostel type of development experience shows that a certain number of infirmary beds are always a necessity. Provision is made for a cer tain number of these beds to be permissible in the construction of a hostel. We intend, Mr. Speaker, to promote this scheme and a full time director of elderly persons' housing is essent ial to present a divirsified program to those many groups, so that interest in such housing may be stimulated and to give leadership in this field. Supervision and advisory services are essent ial.

Provision is made in the Act for licensing of sach premises which we feel must be kept to a very high standard. I think members of the House would ask ourselves, how is this Elderly Persons' Housing Act, or how does it compare with the previous legislation. 1) The province itself will guarantee the loan where necessary.

This achieves greater diversification of devei opment. 2) It stimulates voluntary groups and non-charitable groups and municipalities to dev elop elderly persons' housing for as little as 10% of the total cost to them initially. 3) It pro vides that such accommodation is 43 1/3% donated, that is by government and group, upon com pletion, and this in turn lowers rents. 4) It meets the needs of the single group or the single people in the age group, of which there are so many at that age. 5) It provides for infirm beds in hostels if desired; and 6) It raises income ceilings to five times the rental, less services, over the former provision of the Old Age Assistance ceiling of $960 and $1620 · MR.

GRAY: Mr. Speaker, in principle, I'm not opposed to the Bill. Anything that's being done for the elderly people is very welcome, but I was just thinking -- and I'm not trying to op pose the Bill -- is whether for the elderly people it would be more advisable to build institutions, rather than individual housing.

First of all, in an institution they could have medical attention, nursing attention, social welfare attention, some amusement; they could probably carry on with their religions and particularly those, and there are many of them, who cannot help themselves and it would be difficult for them to ask for help in case of certain emergencies. Now I realize that the construction of the buildings would be very heavy, costly, but at the same time I think it's a permanent institution.

It could be if necessary, be built, although I do not believe in a melting pot, but I also do not believe in too much of segregation, but at the same time for the elderly people religion means quite a bit. This is the only thing they live on and it's very dear to them, and facilities could now only be given in a larger institution.

The experience I've had with one institution in the city, I find that everyone there is quite happy, they have a synagogue; they have a recreation room; they have television; they have radio; people come to entertain them, quite a few artists who come to Winnipeg visit them, and their life is made much happier than otherwise is. Most of the old people haven't got their children around them, perhaps not even in the city or not in the province, but far away. The children may not be able to come around visiting them all the time and they are lonesome, isolated, even in good homes.

So I think perhaps some consideration -- while adopting this -- some consideration sho-.ild be given by the government if at all possible, at least for the majority of the old and aged, for the senior citizens, to build for them institutions where their lives could be made much easier, happier and I think they could get their subsistance for less than it would cost them to be by themselves. So while I'm not discussing the details of this Bill, but I thought perhaps I would suggest this principle of building institutions rather than individual homes, or both.

But the final solution in my opinion is, well run under government supervision, institutions; and I think the govern ment has a perfect right to supervise it because they are making some grants to them. I just respectfully suggest this, not instead of this Bill, because the other proposition may take some time to implement, but you should have it in mind while approving the Bill as it is now. MR. ORLIKOW: Mr.

Speaker, there is hardly a member who represents any of the urban constituencies who would not give hearty endorsation to the principles· enunciated in this Bill, because there are very few constituencies in Greater Winnipeg or in any of'the other urban areas in which the housing accommodations for a fairly large number of the people, not only elderly people, but all people, but certainly for a very large percentage of the elderly people, is far below any standards which we could accept as being adequate.

I'm glad to know that in this Bill the housing accommodations which will be built under the provisions of this Bill will be li censed and be supervised as to their standards. I wish.that all housing accommodations of old people, not only those who will be in these buildings, would be licensed and supervised, because some of the conditions under which people in this city -- and I think the same is true in St. Boni face, the same is true in Brandon and I think the same is true in The Pas -- some of the conditions July 23rd, 1959 Page 1249

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd.) ••.• under which the elderly people areliying are a disgrace to a mod ern society which we claim to be. So we certainly have no objection, indeed we greet with ap proval this proposal. I for one am happy to see the government annoance in the Bill that it is ready to provide, and without going into detail, about approximately a third of the cost of build ing these accommodations. I would like to know, Mr.

Speaker, and possibly the Minister's going to handle this in the capital account, but I would like to get some idea of what program, what ·objective the government is setting for the building of this type of accommodation. I had tt with me, but I couldn't find it to bring it into the House today, a

summary of what is being done in Saskatchewan. Now I don't know whether the Saskatchewan Bill is as good as this Bill, or better than this Bill, or worse; and that's not important as far as I'm concerned, what is important is what we do with the Bill. And as I remember the figures that I saw for Saskatche wan, they have built, and I'm speaking from memory only, they have built over 3, OOO units for elderly people since they began their program.

And I wonld like to know fromtthe Minister, either today or possibly if he prefers to leave it till the capital discussion, I would like to know what plans the government has, what amount of money they think will be required say each year for the-next five years, and how many units they are setting as an objective that will be built, not by the government, but as this Bill proposes, through the co-operation of voluntary, chari table� private; municipal and any other organizations which are going to participate in this pro gram. MR. A. E. WRIGHT (Seven Oaks): Mr.

Speaker, like my honourable colleague I rise to say that we're very happy that this Bill should be presented at this time. It fills a long -- much needed gap. I would just like with your permission, Mr. Speaker, to digress a moment from the Bill itself to senior citizens' housing in general. In the Municipality of West KUdonan we have one of the finest Senior Citizens' Housing Developments in Manitoba. Most of the credit for 1his goes for Mr.

Anatole Bosenko, a new Canadian, who in order to show his appreciation for our way of life, wanted to do something to make life a little more comfortable for our senior citizens. Mr. Bosenko put up 10% of the total cost of this large development, built himself a home across the street, so that he might be close to the project in which he is so interested; and after watching the project for some time, he saw the need for accommodation for single persons.

These couples lived there in happiness and should one of the partners die, it means that they have to leave their friends and the dis trict whicb. they have become so attached. He is now constructing a fine building across the street which will have single suites to fill this need. Now the rents for the suites for the mar ried couples are $45. a month, and of course as we all know, this is on a Central Mortage basis whereby they had put up 90% of 1he money, and from this $45. per month is kept an amount for the maintenance of grounds,. etc.

Now the maintenance of the building is a problem because al though the halls, etc. are the responsibility of the promoter, it has been necessary from time to time to give assistance - because of ill health -- to give assistance to these people to main tain their suites in the fine condition they wish to keep them. In talking with Mr.

Bosenko about senior citizens' housing in general, he pointed out that while he is very happy to have been the means of promoting this project there, he was wondering whether or not the government could give some consideration to the supplying of appliances to these elderly P'aople, so that they might be able to take advantage of all the modern ways of making it easier to keep their suites in fine condition.

There also is the concern of the municipality of course, in regard to the residence quali fications for these tenants of senior citizens' housing, and although the Social Allowances Bill no doubt take care of much of the need, it seems to me that because one community is more desirable, and because it has the type of citizen who would promote this type of venture, it seems to me that this community should not be penalized because of their interest in this type of development.

And I would urge the government to look into the matter of assuming responsi bility for the residence of people where it can be shown that one municipality is carrying the load more than others in this regard. MR. J. COWAN (Winnipeg Centre): Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased to see this housing legislation. I have had the opportunity of seeing the housing conditions under which many of our olrl people live, for I had the opportunity to look after the construction of Canadian Legion Gar� dens built by the Canadian Legion for forty elderly low-income couples and I still -- I'm the Page 1250 July 23rd, 1959

(Mr. Wright, cont'd.) •.• • president of the organization and manage the project. I've seen the need for this accommodation, and particularly the need for single people, because we have far more single elderly low-income persons than we have married couples. And I am pleased to see too, that the legislation has been changed somewhat from what it was formerly; it will now permit for instance persons of 60 to 65 years of age to obtain help in these suites. We found a number of people who had strokes or who had very high, bad heart conditions, that were about 60 years of age, and under the former legislation they weren't eligible for suites;

whereas they will be eligible with the consent of the Minister in the housing accommodation built under this Act. And I'm very Jllleased too, to see the additional money help from the Provincial Government and the fact that they are going to employ a person to give leadership in this construction work. It is a great deal of work -- a great deal of work has to be done· by any organization and the people in it, and thefact that the government is going to provide some help will mean a great deal to groups. I know that in St.

James Kiwanis, they built a wonderful project, but at times those that were sponsoring it just about felt like giving up because of the various troubles and because they didn't have anyone that they could go to for help, like they will have, but then the Provincial· Government hires their Director. This program too, will be helped I'm sure in cases where we can't get the rents low enough, by grants under our new Social Allowances Act.

In Saskatchewan they had to strictly comply with the federal requirements if they wished to build a hostel type of accommodation, which requi,res. that for every person that was put in the hostel type of accommodation, the organization had to build accommodation for two people in self-contained suites; and the result is that they built in the rural parts of Saskatchewan, more self-contained suites than they needed. In Kam sack they actually weren't able to find enough elderly persons for the suites and they rented them to others.

And this is going to be a great advantage over that scheme to have our scheme where there will be no restrictions like that, and where the Provincial Government can guarantee hostels -- the mortgages on hostels, without relationship to the number that are accommodated in self-contained suites. And this Act too -- the Honourable Member for Inkster says -- we should make provision for building institu tions -- and this Act does make provision for building institutions if that type of housing is de sired; but I submit, Mr.

Speaker, this Act makes provision for a new type of housing, not built with government help in any other part of Canada which will be of great assistance to our elderly people in Manitoba; and that is that this Act makes provision for the construction of housing accommodation which is not self-contained for elderly single people, where the elderly single people would share alounge and share bathroom and toilet facilities; and this will have the effect of bringing down the cost; and this will have the effect of helping to reduce two of the greatest problems of old age, which are idleness and loneliness.

In England where they've had a great deal more experience along this line than in Canada, we find that in December 1956 they started giving encouragement, giving subsidies to a new type of accommodation which they called "flatlets", where the elderly single person was ren ted accommodation in a fairly large building where the kitchen facilities were provided, and where they shared a lounge and shared bathroom and toilet facilities; and in this way the elderly person had something to do.

They had their own shopping to do; they had their own cooking to do; they had their own rooms to look after; and they could bring their own furniture and pieces of china and pictures into their own room.

Now these are all very important to our older people, and this is -- these things are not available in most of our institutions in this city, where they provide everything for them; they provide the meals; they do the cooking, I was in a large one in Hamilton, Ontario recently, built just like a palace, and the old people were sitting around there just as though they were waiting to die, because they had nothing to do, but this type of accommodation, these 'flatlets' as they're called in the old couhtry gives these older people something to do; it enables them to live a life in a more natural way than in an institution; and it has been found in England that it is the better type of accommodation to pro mote for older people who are still able to look after themselves, It is important because it overcomes those two problems of loneliness and idleness, and so in this Act which is -- there is provision for building that type of accommodation and this is something that is not available in any other province of Canada with government help.

So I think we will go forward and lead other provinces in that respect. As a matter of fact the survey that was recently made by the Urban Renewal Board of July 23rd, 1959 Page 1251

{Mr. Cowan, cont'd.) ••••• South Point Douglas recommended that such accommodation should be built for the single elderly people in that area; and of course that type of accommodation where they share some facilities is much cheaper to construct and operate than are self-con tained suites. If you build self-contained suites for elderly persons even with all the govern ment help that is now provided, about the cheapest you can rent them is $40. 00 a month;

whereas if they share some of these facilities, you will be able to reduce the rent considerably and so make them available to a greater number of people, specially those with the lowest of incomes. This additional help for housing, I am sure, is going to help the conditions in our nursing homes and in our hospitals. I know that there are some people in our nursing homes who do not re quire nursing home care, but they have no place to go to; they have no place where they can look after themselves and do their own cooking and so on, and some of them are having to stay in those institutions for that reason.

And I know over at Princess Elizabeth some of them, the older people are given quite a lot of physiotherapy, and they are brought back to a pretty good state of health and then they have to get out. and they find unfortunately that they haven't got a place to go to where they can look after themselves -- a decent place, and they are soon back in hospital again and all the time and money that was spent on them with regard to physiotherapy treatments has been wasted. So we will provide housing accommodation which will certainly be be of great value in many, many ways.

There is one thing and that is that this housing accom modation is to a large extent dependent upon organizations and municipalities initlating the schemes.

Now we all are residents in one municipality or another and we and our wives all be long to various organizations, and I would hope that each of the members of this House would not go back to their constituencies and think of it being necessary for other organizations to build these institutions, or build this housing; but that each of us would go to our own organiza tion whether it be a trade union, or a legion branch, or a service club, or a church, and try within our own organization to try and promote these housing developments, so that we will better the conditions of our old people in this province. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister is closing the debate. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Speaker, in closing this debate I'll be very brief. I just want to bring a few points to the attention of members and try and answer some questions which were asked in a very co-operative manner. The whole object of this Bill, as expressed by the hon ourable --I'd like to point out to the Honourable.

Member of Inkster, I should say, that the whole purpose of this Bill is to give diversification and to prevent as much as we possible can the saying, as one person put it to me "pretty soon we'll build one institution and we'll all crawl into it. " I'm not saying this in any criticism of the member's feeling. I quite agree with him that all these people, that we're better, just as the Act says. to stimulate charitable groups, church groups, religious groups, to form this - to develop this type of housing. This brings great joy to people in their old age to be in an institution when they get very aged.

And the need for hostels is great because the great age at which people are coming into hostels, makes it necessary that we have them, that is the type of care where the patient comes down for meals and for --has a central dining room and so on. The age of an institution in my home town of 115 people is 83 years of age. Often shortly after admission one or two of these people may have a slight stroke or become a little ill. They may be laid up in bed for three weeks to ·a month. These old people, when this occurs, become very demoralized if they have to be i:qoved to a hospital.

Most of the homes caring for the aged in the hospital type accommodation such as the Fairview Home in Brandon, the Bethel Home in Gimll, have found that a certain number of infirmary beds are very important. And we find now with the hospital plan upon us. that I don't think it will be too long, Mr. Speaker, before the federal authorities see it our way and will come along with us in this type of development.

We have to keep a certain pJ,"oportion of these beds in these hostels as infirmary beds and not let them become too numerous, other wise we will be running secon:i rate hospitals such as happened in Nova Scotia a long time ago when they built many hostels throughout the land and let them become absolutely full of sick people and they became known as county poor houses, because then --another factor there, of course, was the lack of standards. So we feel, and the people we have talked to feel, that we're better to keep the infirmary portion down to a 20% level and to promote this type of scheme.

Now in Saskatchewan, as the Honourabie Member from st; John's mentioned, our legisla tion is\better, our grant structure is better, and also there they follow CHMC regulations Page 1252 July 23rd, 1959

(Mr. Johnson, cont'd. ) •••• where you have to have . two hoasing units for every hostel bed. In the desire for the hostel type of accommodation complementing the housing type, they have had to build quite a few more of the housing units than was really desirable. That's why we felt in the hostel type accommodation we would have more flexibility by not worrying about the Federal Government guaranteeing the loan in this instance.

I would inform the House that I have written the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation, whom I feel should allow the diver siffcation and open up their Act to guarantee loans where there are a certain proportion of in firmary beds . I think too, Mr. Speaker, the hos pital plan will sooner or later show that this is true. I've had many municipalities in also, whe re they wish to build low cost housing units in various smaller towns around the central larger towns where they plan to build a hostel next to say an acute hos pital.

This is the ideal type of arrangement that we would like to see the municipalities do. And again almost any municipality, any charitable group and so on, can do this. The Member for Seven Oaks brought up a point where he pointed out that in this develop ment, that this very fine new Canadian has ventured in the field of elderly persons housing, that the rents are $45. 00. Again Mr. Speaker, I do not know of an elderly person housing unit in the Province of Manitoba renting under $40. 00 a month service.

This again is the reason for our increased grant structure to try and bring this rental down in order to prevent too much subsidization being necessary at the top. We do feel again that the type of housing that this gentleman had was obtained throught the - by formation of a limited dividend company repre senting a five or ten percent equity of the individual - is not as desirable with a 90% loan in that case as is the type of legislation we have here . I quite agree with everyone in pointing out the many benefits of this type of legislation.

I do agree that -- and the Age and Opportunity Bureau made a very big point in saying - "We do not believe in institutions. We don't want to see these people in institutions. We'd rather see them in diversified type of housing. Some people like to be alone and make a pot of coffee for their old friends in a single unit; some married couples double units. Some would like a fraternity house type of development with a communal recreational room plus their own kitchen facilities.

" This again - we are giving the enabling legislation for this type of developmmt. ·S ome towns want to develop the units with a central hostel. Again there's wide diversification available to them. But the big thing is leadership. When we hear of these developments we got to get our director out there to meet with these groups, to have different designs and ideas available for them. The Age and Oppor tunity Bureau brought this out. And the big point they said, hostels alone are not the answer. Keep old people independent, the ones that want to be, as long as you can.

Wherever again we had the pure hostel development such as in Gimli and other places, you now have the desire for the boards to branch out into low cost single and double housing units. They see the need for both. Under our plan we can go this without the restrictions as I say, of Central Housing and Mortgage. Again I quite agree with - - two speakers have mentioned, lonesomeness and - loneliness I should say, is the biggest deterrent in old age - the grea�st difficulty. I had the privilege of attending a course on stressing and aging a few years back in Philadelphia, where I heard a man, Dr.

Solomon, who is Chief of Psychiatry at Mass achusetts General Hosp"ital, who said, when a bunch of general practitioners were asking him what sedatives he used in the aged, because every physician finds that pretty soon he's changing his pills all the time, he said "I don't allow a pill in my insittution of 3, 500 beds . I insist that the intern goes and spends half an hour with his patient. " This was very significant and shows that this is a universal finding. However, I have pointed out that we -- it's been indicated that what do we expect to develop in elderly persons housing ?

I don't think -- I think the legislation is one thing, and I emphasize again, I feel the leadership in bringing this to the public is the next. How success ful we are there will depend how much we'll be asking you for next year. Thank you. MR . GRAY: Would the Honourable Minister permit a question, Mr. Speaker? Although ·i t may be too early, can you tell the House if the Bill is passed, what will be the procedure for individual applicants? · MR.

JOHNSON (Gi.mli.): In answer to that question I would say that as soon as the Bill is passed we would hope to set up our director of elderly persons' housing, and this would be the man to whom any charitable group or municipality and so on, should get in contact with right July 23rd, 1959. Page 1253

(Mr •. Johnson, cont'd. ) •••• away and talk over the matter with him •• ••••• Our Welfare Department. MR. ORLIKOW: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could ask the Minister a question:.> I recognize this is a new venture, but doesn't the Minister have some objective for the next year or two -- 100 units, 200, 500, something, so that we may have some idea of what's been planned. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): •••••••• of old folks housing in four years, that's my objective. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? Mr. Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR.

SPEAKER: Second reading of Bill No. 88. The Honourable the Minister of Labour. MR. . LYON: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Honourable Minister of Labour, I wonder if the House would permit this matter to stand? · MR. SPEAKER: Order stand. MR. SPEAKER: Committee of Supply. HON. DUFF. ROBLIN (Premier) (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable the Minister of Health and Public Welfare, that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her .Majesty.· Mr.

Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried, and the House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. MR. SPEAKER: Would the Honourable Member for st. Matthews take the Chair. MR. CHAIRMAN: Department 8. MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Chairman, I think it was generally understood last night that we would take Welfare sometime this afternoon, so, if the Committee is agreeable, we will proceed with Welfare on page 20 right now. · MR. CHAIRMAN: Item 3. Welfare Division. (

a) Public Welfare Services. MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Chairman, I think I have said probably a little more than I should have said about the Department of Health - Public Welfare, -- but I'm sure that in introducing these estimates I really haven't got a great deal to say as regards to the principle as to why these things are up. As we come to each item, I'd be only too glad to enlarge upon them if I may.

I feel that the one thing the Committee should bear in mind as they go through the items, the big change is in the Public Welfare Services, and the major increases as we note are in salaries; it will be necessary for us torecruitthe staff to do the job; we have been under staffed largely in the past in this field; it's a challenge to the administration to get this staff and to do the job that we want to do. Our supplies and materials will be up from the same reason, because of increased staff.

Under Social Allowances, as you know, we now lump to gether Social Assistance and Mothers' Allowance type of cases which the province formerly paid 100%, that is the Mothers' Allowance case load of around one million, one every year, plus the Social Allowance item -- Social Assistance item; and then in addition to that, this year for the balance of this year, or, we anticipated that we certainly wouldn't be facing a full year's · �stimate in this Department and we therefore temporized the figure four million, six.

And I point out also that here again the province is relieving the municipti.lities of child welfare 100%, which makes our item of $928, OOO. 00 as the estimate for child welfare in the coming year. Also you will notice increase in grants to charitable insti.tutions· which as we will find, is largely absorbed through the increased staff to the --neces sitated by the Children's Aid Society. The Children's Aid Society, of course, receives about $200, OOO. 00 a year in volunteer fun ds, and the province will be paying the full per diem cost of children committed to their care.

Our municipal aid expenditures are naturally down because the municipalities will be spending less. When we come to the Alcohol Rehabilitation item, I shall be only too glad to make a statement in that regard. Further in the estimates there is really nothing - 110 major policy changes at all except I would like to say under the item of Disability Allowance. We have managed to achieve a slightly greater

interpretation of this allowance or of these regulations. This is a Federal Act, this is

an Act which is shared 50-50 with the government and we .must adhere to the legislation which says in effect "that a person must be totally incapacitated, (

b) that that incapacity must continue as far as we can tell will co�ue indefinitely; and thirdly that it interferes with normal living. " Page 1254 Jnly 23rd, 1959.

(Mr. Johnson, cont'd. ) •.•. Now all of us in this House have a different inte rpretation of those words -- tlu:ee purposes as set out in the Federal regulations, but I spoke to the Minister con cerning this and we had the Federal representative out here last fall and he met with our DA panel and we found statistically that we were not taking advantage of this allowance to the extent that other provinc es were: We were one of the lowest. And it was sim ply that they were able to broaden this, especia lly in the direction of mental inc apacity.

I'm sure we all know of cer- . ·ta.in individ uals who are really not totally and permanently incapacitated. They are people who are able to dr�ss themselves and get � ound although some of them may even be crippled. But they have never made a proper living and there are many reasons back of this . It might have been the upbringing, the attitude of the family towards such a person and so on.

In any event, the man be.comes a non-bread winner and in cases like this the Federal authoritie s told us we could relax somewhat there and this has meant a substantial inc rease in the numbers of people who have come on disability allowance. And we are, because of this relaxation, reviewing systematic ally all the applications that have been refused since the allowance started. And to this end we achieved - have done quite a bit of work. A.nd also the estimate is up a bit because we require more medical consultation in this year to com plete this survey.

I thirik that's . really all I can say in introducing the item in sort of a general way, Mr. Chairm an. MR, ·CAMPBELL: Mr. Chairman, I have one disagreement to voice concerning the Hon our.able the Ministe r, and it is this; that when he began his remarks by saying that he thought perhaps he had said too much already on this matter.

I want to say to him that I think that the one reason that he's got along so well with what are admittedly very difficult estimat es, is· · because he has said a lot; because it reqii ires a lot to be said; and because he tried his level best to answer all the questions fully and compfotely; and because he seems to be tremendously inte rested in his subject. Having said that and I mean it quite sincerely, I would also say that the Honoilrable the Ministe r, knowing my record in this regard would perhaps not expect me not to be as enthusiastic about some of these programs as he is.

I can't help but thiriking about the cost oLsome of them. And the question that I would like to - there are two questions that I would like to ask. One is, and I thirik perhaps that I should address this to the Honourable the . Provincial Treasurer.1 rather than to the Mini ster. I understood the Minister to indicate that with regard to the Social Allowances vote of four million six, that in this vote the Department recognized that'they were not facing a full year - now perhaps I misunderstood the Min ister - but if that 'was a correct·

interpretation of what he sai d, · I thirik it is right to say that even thoµgh we certai:nly haven't a full year to go from now, it still is the fact, I think, Mr. Chairman, . that the.advances urider which the Department has been working up-to-date, will be absorbed into this amount that w�'re voting now. So 'that if that i s correct, then this amount of four six is the effective vote for the year. Is that not right ? MR, ·ROBLIN: I just want to be sure that I know what my ho:aourable friend means "the effective vote for the year.

" The figu res shown here are the monies that we expect to spend during the course of the year. But it is quite right to say that this does not represent what it will .cost us to operate this plan for a full year, because, as honourable members will appreciate , it wasn't considered wise by us to proceed with these matters, certainly until the House had given its approval-to the Social Allowances Bill, and associa ted matters with it, certainly until we'd been returned to power.

So we di dn't wish to go ahead with any of these plans and hiring ·the people to man them until such time as we knew that we would have the full responsibility 'for carrying them out without any question. So, that means that it's going to be a few months, I don't know·how many, no more than we can help, before we have the full staff employed and this program in action. So that no money is being paid out under it at the present tim e; nor will.it be until such time as the machinery is in operation.

So that means that the figu res shown in here represent the cost for what we guess we'll spend - and it is a guess in large measure - · in the balance of this fiscal year after the plan gets rolling. The estimate that we will bring in next yearwhich will reflect a full year's experience, and there's a lot of experience to be gained in this, let's admit it frankly, will be very conside rably higher than the figures that are shown in these estimates this year. I trust that's what my honourable friend was driving at. MR. CAMPBELL: That, Mr.

Chairman, is what I was driving at, but I'm afraid I was misin terpretating what the Honourable the Minister meant; because what I had thought he meant was that the inte rim supply that we had voted had taken care of the expenditure. But I realize July 23rd, 1959. Page 1255

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd. ) •••• that that isn't the case, and I quite understand the situation. I thought that's what the Honourable the Minister meant. I see that it wasn't. That's quite O.K . Mr. Chairman, the other question that I was going to ask the Minister himself, was with regard to the Disability Allowanc es. I listened caref ully to the report that he made and I know that he has been dealing with the matter. Does he feel that there is a good likelihood of the Federal Government relaxing its attitude with regard to the very strict

interpretations that they now place upon disability ? MR. JOHNSON (Gimli) : Mr. Chairman, in that regard I'd just like to try and explain to the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition, the main diff iculty was that they were worried very much about the field of 'partial ' disability. They have spelled out this word totally incapacitated, and physically one almost has to be, just as it says, totally incapacitated. But then other province·s were getting this, although the person wasn't totally incapacitated, they were certainly totally incapacitated in our mind as far as normal living went.

They were not living normally even though not totally incapacitated. And I think every panel across the land has a slig ht variation of this, and it's a very diff icult thing. However, I would point out to the honourable member, the Leader of the Opposition, that in our new Social Allowanc es Act where we have an individual who doesn't quite measure up to the disability legislation, but who, in the opinion of the .Department and the opinion of doctors and so on, certainly can't live normally or make his way in the world, and is in need, we can meet that.

So I look at it as though our Social Allowan ces Act kind of fi xes the DA. MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Chairman, I can understand how easy it would be with the diff erent boards, diff erent panels operating in the diff erent provinces, how difficult -- how easy it would be rather than diffi cult -- for there to be ten diff erent

interpretations of disability. I can see that. But I would think that the place that you would expect to get the unifo rmity would be in the Federal

interpretation of that term of di sability. As a matter of fac t, I always under stood that that was our controlling factor here in Manitoba. And shouldn 't the Federal Govern ment have added that touch of uniformity so that even if individual provinces interpreted the term diff erently, that the Federal Government would see that all were treated equally in that regard. MR. JOHNSON (Giml i): Mr. Chairman, that is why I asked this head of this panel in Ottawa to come and speak to our panel members - because I wanted this def ined.

And I should have been more clear, Sir, but the things that we found - that he found here, was that our panel was not interpreting the mental incapacity, the person in the light of their psychiatric history and so on, as liberally as were the other provinces. Now there were one or two provinces who were at as low a case load as we were, but for instance you come to one province it was way up; and this is where he thought that we were being a little too strict possibly. He thought this is where both his federal member of the panel and the provincial member should look at this type of patient.

Although not totally physically incapacitated� they certainly were incapacitated mentally to the point where they could not make a normal living, and therefore he said we could take them on. Now, previously they were excluded - I think that's the best way of putting it. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, I was interested in the first question raised by the Hon ourable the Leader of the Opposition and the answer given by the First Minister in respect of this four million six.

Now if I understood the Provincial Treasurer correctly, he mentioned that he didn't know exactly when this plan would gather their staff, they were waiting the passage of the new Social Allowanc es Bill, and the estimates, and it may take a little while to get the thing rolling. Now I would like to ask the Provincial Treasurer whether or not he anticipated when he laid the estimates before us, before the cessation of the last legis latu re, that it would take the same period of time in order to have this measure passed, presuming that the same administration was upheld at that session.

Because I note that it's exactly the same figure in respect of Social Allowanc es now in the estimates as were in the previous estimate. Did they anticipate at that time, had the estimates been passed and the Social Allowanc es Bill passed in the last session, that it would have taken just as long as up till today, plus an additional couple of months, as suggested by the First Minister in order to get going:? MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Chairman, our Jud�ent on those matters was pretty close to being accurate. Page 1256 July 23rd, 1959 .

MR. PAULLEY: I beg your pardon? I didn't hear that. MR. ROBLIN: We were pretty close to estimating the course of events. MR. PAULLEY: Oh yes, Mr. Chairman, that's all very well for my honourable friend the First Minister to say today. Then can I take it from that then that in respect of the last session of the legislature, you were determined that in the interim between then and now, that there would be another provincial election?

Do I take from your words that despite your state ment on the hustings that we defeated you, that you are now admitting that you foresaw it, and that the reason that the estimate was as is now, and was then, included that? MR. ROBLIN: I've lost the tract of that rather wordy question; would you repeat it? MR.

PAULLEY: Well I'll try and make it simple so as my friend can understand it. (Interjection) Do I take it from your remarks then, when you state that you foresaw the events and that the amount of the estimate now is the same as it was then; that despite your public statement that we defeated you, that you knew you were going to get defeated, and thereby only provided in your estimate.

And if we carry that through to its logical conclusion, then you certainly have been wrong, in accusing we of the Opposition in deferring the payments of social assistance and allowances as outlined in your Bill, to the needy people in the Province of Manitoba: . MR. ROBLIN: I don't think I can prevent my honourable friend from taking any meaning he wishes from what I said, because he's pretty good at that. I certainly have no intention of rehashing the debate as to how the government was defeated, but I am going to get to the central point of what he's talking about.

And that is, did we estimate that it would take us several months of time to prepare these procedures_ so that this could be put into effect, and we certainly did. Now we had two alternatives when we came to print these estimates: we coulq reduce the amount if we wished, because we realized that the time element was now extended, or we could leave it in. We decided to leave it in. We don't know whether we're going to use it all - or maybe more - or maybe not all of it. Because this is a brand new program; we've never tried it before; we have to find out how much it costs.

And we had the simple choice of going through the calculation.B and taking an arbitrary reduction for another couple of months as to the date as which this thing would be operating, and thus changing our estimates . And I can assure my friend that there is nothing so sinister to be read into these figures as he is trying to make out. MR. PAULLEY: There wasn't much sinister read into the figures.

All I was going by was the statement of the Honourable the First Minister himself, and if he would take the time tomorrow - or when we meet again, or when the copies of Hansard are available - to read what he said in his opening remarks in answer to my question, he'll find that I'm not raising sinister questions on this - on the amount. MR. ROBLIN: No, _but you are willing to put the worst construction on them. MR. PAULLEY: I'm just willing to use your own words, my friend. MR. . ROBLIN: I'm not your friend; I'm your honourable friend. MR. PAULLEY: All right, Mr.

Chairman, may I in all humility retract the fact that I called the First Minister my friend? -- my honourable friend. MR. ROBLIN: That's it. MR. PAULLEY: Who now wears the crown! MR. ORLIKOW: Mr. Chairman, I think the point which is important is this, that when these estimates were proposed 1;1.t the last session, before the election, the amount proposed was for exactly the amount which is being proposed today, namely $4, 684, OOO. 00.

Now the public was told - and I suppose that many things are permissible during an election - but the public was told on almost every platform during that election campaign, that by the defeat of the government, the day when the people who needed assistance - the old age pensioners and the people on mothers' allowances and so on - the day when they would get the increased assistance had been postponed. Now, if this were so, Mr.

Chairman, if they could have gone ahead with it almost immediately, as was inferred by almost every speaker and every candidate for the government, then since it has been deferred, obviously today when we are discussing a much shorter period, the amount should be smaller. I said during the campaign - I didn't get much coverage, I'm just a backbencher - I said during the campaign that from the draft estimate, one could only assume one of two things - either that the amounts which would be given to the people who were going to get increases was much less than they had been-led to July 23rd, 1959. Page 125?7

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd. ) •• ; • believe, or else - and I wanted to be honest - or else that it would take somewhere between four and six months to set up the organization to administer this. This is what I believed, and this is what is proved in these draft estimates - the fact that it takes time, and that, theref ore, it would have been October the first bef ore this program could have started, whether we had an election or not.

I don't mind, because I know it takes time to set this up; but I do resent - I resented it then and I still resent - I think it was completely unfair for candidates - and they did it from one end of the province to the other, representing the government party - to suggest that in fact the time when people would get increased assistance was delayed by the defeat of the governme"Gt. It was not delayed - it would have taken the government till October the first to do it, and it' s proved by the figure which we have today. , MR. ROBLIN: Mr.

Chairman, the honourable member made a number of interesting statements during the election, one of them which was that the Communist Party was support ing the members of the government. He made a - and I don't think that what he said now is of much more validity than what he said on that particular matter.

I would like to point _out to him that what was said at that time about the delay is right, because we have had to spend 46 days - or whatever it is - having a general election, arid we couldn't open the House right away, and no government, I think, should proceed with these matters until they've been approved by the House, and that's what we've done. But I say-to my honourable friend opposite that l· am sur prised that they haven't raised this issue befo re, because it isn't merely in connection with Health and Welfare that we 've fac ed this problem, but it is in connection with other matters.

Take the proceedings in the Attorney- General 's Department for prison reform , and matters of that sort - all of them have had to have been delayed. Now we could go through these estimates and knock off, if we had taken the trouble to do so, some money here and there to take account · of that fact. We didn't do so. But there is nothing sinister in that fact. MR. PAULLEY: . There is, Mr. Chairman, if I may, one vast diff erence in this.

Because my honourable friend opposite did say to the people of Manitoba, and made specific referenc e on numerous occasions both over TV, radio and the public platf orm, and emphasized this partic ular item, that we were the ones who caused it. And my honourable friend , in his opening statement today, said that he prejudged that that was what was going to happen in respect of when these estimates were laid before us at the last session of the last legislature.

But ·"apart from that - apart from that - my honourable friend knew just after the date of the election that his administration was going to continue into power, not on the sam e basis as bef ore, but with a supreme majority over all parties in this House; and I suggest this, in all defe rence to the First Minister, of another period of but two or three months that the organization could have been set:up; becaus e I would suggest this, that in: other fields as well, that the administration has not waited until the formal approval of these estimates and the bringing down of the budget to do other essential things which are part of their program.

Now if the Honourable the First Minister can assure me that no department at all has been expanded or increased in respect of staff or additional expenditures of money until such time as this House formally has passed all of the estimates, then I have to retract my thoughts in respect of getting ahead with the '.nb of Manitob a. But I do suggest that that is not the case - that the programs of expansion in oth 8r departments have gone on without - as my honourable friend says - the passing of these estimates formally. MR. ROBLIN: Mr.

Chairman, even if I were able to say to my honourable friend that other departments had gone on in the interval, he would still have to reckon with the actual time of the election itself. We can't get away from that point.

But I would like to say this "' and I say this in all seriousness and I'm not trying to be diff icult with my honourable friend - I would say this, that I think -it would have been wrong for us to have proceeded by the Special .W arrent metho:i in carrying out the p�grams that we had envisaged, even if we had been successful in winning the election, and theref ore, had had public approval of them; because during the election we undertook to hold a sessi on,convene as soon as we possibly could after wards, which we did.

Now I very much doubt that it would have been proper for us to have had recourse, except in cases of emergencies, and I think probably the Royal Visit may have been the only one where Special Warrants needed to be passed. Because after all the House, before we rose f or the election, did give us interim supply tO carry on with, so that we colild carry on the business of the government. . Page 1258 July 23rd, 1959 •

(Mr. Roblin, cont'd. ) ..•• Now I would say this to my honourable friend, that in any depart ment where they were able to work within the limits of that interim supply and they had an urgent case for hiring a man here or there, in connection with that matter, I would have no doubt that that may have taken place, and that to that extent his view of the matter may be correct. But you have to remember that in this department we're hiring another 60 or 70 people to make this thing go, and that once they get going the rate of outpay of money ls some thing which no interim supply measure could poss ibly take care of.

So I don't think that, being practical about this thing, I don't think that I am open to the charge that he is trying to make that we did it in one department - why not in another. We may have. made some moves within the limitations of the special - of the supplementary supply that was passed, but not beyond that and not into the field of spec ial warrants , which otherwise would be the case. After all, the House was meeting, and I thought once the House starts to meet, we can't even do that - spec ial warrent isn't open to us - so we simply don' t have the money until the House votes it. MR.

PAULLEY: Doesn't my honourable friend think that the basis of this program could have been laid in the interim - even if he's right about the actual expenditure of the money in the form of chequeE going out to recipients of this ass istanc e? But could not of, in the interim, all of the basis of the plan been ready for operation so that on the passage of the Bill and the passage of the estimates - which are assured, because my honourable friend wears the crown - could not that have been done?

Now my honourable friend, if I understood him correctly, says it will be a matter of a couple of months or so before the organization gets cracking on this thing, and I suggest that that foundation, or groundwork, could have been laid long before. MR. ROBLIN: Mr. Friend's suggestion is out of place. As I've already said, the first thing you've got to do is meet the payroll. We haven't got the money to meet the payroll until my honourable friends give it to us. ' MR. ORLIKOW: Mr. Chairman, I just want to take one minute to correct an impress ion of a very unimportant matter.

The Honourable First Minister said - I think he said, as I got it - that I said during the election that the Communists were supporting ...•• MR. ROBLIN: You may not have said it, but I gathered that from the newspapers . MR. ORLIKOW: Well what I said, Mr.

Chairman - I think it was reported fairly in the newspaper, but I would like it to be in the records - I simply pointed out that the only three candidates nominated by the Communists were nominated in those constituencies represented by my Honourable Friend from Inkster, My Honourable Friend from Burrows and myself; that obviously they had no cha nce of election and that the only thing which their nomination could · do would be possi bly to add a couple of seats on that side of the House.

I did suggest some what facetiously - I don't suppose anybody took me seriously, unless possibly the Honourable the First Minister - that if they hadn't received financial help from that side of the House that they ought to ask for it. !'don't think anybody else took it very seriously. (Interject ion) I wish we had more . MR . CHAIRMAN: (a) 1 Passed. 2. Passed • • • • • • • • • • Continued on next page July23rd, 1959. Page 125 9

MR . PAULLEY: Mr . Chairman, I would like to ask \he Minister if I may, the other day when we were discussing your new Social Allowances Bill I asked if you could supply the Com mittee with the figures that were formerly paid by the municipalities , which will be taken over by the provincial authority. Were you able to get those figures, Mr . Minister? MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): You don't mean the total cost -- the total relief to municipalities? MR . PAULLEY: No , what I actually meant, Mr .

Chairman, if I may, the Minister has informed us , and we're glad to hear it, that the provincial authority is going to take over cer tain responsibilities and expenditures, which were formerly taken care of by the municipalities; and my request was, the supplying of, the approximate amount of money which was formerly paid by the municipalities, say in any given year, which is now going to be taken over by the provincial authority. MR . JOHNSON (Gimli): Yes , Mr. Chairman, the gross -- let's see we're in the Depart ment of Welfare.

The municipal year ends on the 3lst of December, and we proj ected this forward on our experience to date, till the end of March -- we haven't got the final windup for March, but as close as we can deduct, in this past year the gross municipal expenditures up until March 3lst, 1959, woUld be Three million, three twenty-five; and the reimbursements on that would be Two million 063 , for a net municipal expenditure of One million, two.

Now when our program gets going on a full year's basis, that is the present program based on a year, we estimate that the gross municipal expenditure will be One million, zero three three , with a provincial reimbursement of . 433. But you can see quite readily in the estimates this year that in, for instance, take Child Welfare; formerly they got approximately, on the 40-80 basis, the municipalities were reimbursed in that total figure, and then again, now that is pulled out of municipal reimbursement. There is one thing.

Another thing, wea!l'.'erelievingthemunici palities of the aged and infirm, and all those cases of desertion and death over a year, as you know, and jail. Instead of the municipalities paying these in the first instance, the province will take that over, so we are leaving the municipalities with those three things -- desertion and jail under a year , and unemployable adults .

So our provincial -- this is where you get a little mixed up -- the municipal reimbursement is much less because the municipal expenditure is much less, and in one instance the province is assuming a large hunk of what was formerly municipal responsibility. But then again, once the program gets to its full fruition and we get our cash allowances set up, you can see again that this of course is something that will be quite over and above these municipal relief problems. Now I think that .. does that answer your question Sir? -- No? MR . PAULLEY: Mr .

Chairman, I guess possibly we'll have to discuss this so we get together on the deal, but actually what I was trying to arrive at was the total amount -- apart from the 40-60 or any other recovery back from the provincial government which municipali ties got -- the total amount which was formerly expended by municipalities for all of the ser vices which were provided.

What I am trying to arrive at -- and maybe this is the wrong way of going around it -- what I'm trying to arrive at was the former total cost of the provision of the services rendered by the municipalities for which, of course, they were reimbursed by the province, I know that -- but the total expenditure in respect of child welfare, social assistance and the likes of that, in the Province of Manitoba, so that we could arrive at the picture of what the actual added contributions of the province -- or the actual increase in the amount, shall I say -- that is going to be paid overall in respect of these .services.

Am I a little more clear now? MR . JOHNSON (Gimli); Well I'll try and be more clear, but I think we have to attack it from another angle. If we have the gross, Mr. Chairman, the gross municipal expenditure last year -- let's say it was Three million. Three; then the province had an expenditure of the Mothers' Allowance case load of around One million, One or One Million, Two, plus social assistance in unorganized territories. Those two were purely provincial. The municipalities paid out the Three million three, or we estimated by the end of March of last year.

Then again the total municipal e:Kpenditure of Three million three included aged and infirm and all those cases we have mentioned except the three types that they are going to be left with. Now all I can explain is that in a whole year, this will mean a relief to the municipalities of Two million three. We'll be relieving them in a full year of Two Million three of this responsibility; and leaving them with those three types of cases; where previously the province , for instance, only Page 1260 July 23rd, 1959.

(Mr . Johnson (Gi mli), cont' d.) ••.•• paid, .2 90 for wards of the province, in relieving the municipali ties we relieve them and our bill becomes 928 . It would cost the municipalities Six hundred thousand; but that' s in your Three million three of their total disbursement . In other words , the total gross municipal disbursement is Three million three, we figur .ed up until March of this year . Our own program will cost, I think, by the end of March, Two million eight, and these are up because of the increased per diem rates ·of the aged and infirm in our nursing homes which the municipalities are paying.

And then again these two plus Child Wel fare gives , for instance , a total provincial cost last year of Four million nine . That is our reimbursement to municipalities plus our payments -- our own provincial cases came to Four million Nine four fi ve . That's the total provincial ticket . Now , for the portion of the,year , you can see the difficulty we're in, and I'm not a bookkeeper, but I must say that the Provincial Treasurer has been most helpful in ass isting me in this interim period.

However, we did put th is figure -- we realized right off the top that our provincial social allowance and mothers' allowance this year for the balanc e of the year on the new program will be about Two million sevm,beca use we'll be picking up a lot of that other stuff. Then again, we just put Two million dollars in; we thought that would be ample be cause we knew what it was going to cost us for a whole year , and last spring when we drew these up -- and I must say, Mr.

Chairman, that the department , the civil servants there , have worked lung hours in the past year drawing up this Act, hundreds of meetings , hundreds of hours of overtime , of my senior, the deputy and his assi stant in assi sting me in trying to bring this in, put it in black and white -- and I must say that I don't think it could have been done any more efficiently than these men have assisted me in trying to do. Certainly if there is any lag here, it's my responsibility .

But I do feel that we felt our new program would cost us so much for the year , and we felt honestly that last spring when we said this that -- before the last election -- that this would take us till October to get the staff , because supposing we do - wanted to start right away with cash allowances , and we're trying to build this staff, it will take -- one worker probably could make four or five inve stigations a day , going to see these people to see what their needs are . You multiply that by, in a month say she made a hundred calls -- or he -- in a staff of 22 -- 2200 calls a month.

It will take you three months to pro cess 6, 000 applications the way we want to do it. We realize that's why we need staff . But this is going to take time , and it's no use trying to fool anyone . We're as anxious as can be to get this program into effect and we're going to go at it as hard as we can ; and the staff have shown tremendous co-opera tion and we're adding -- we've got 53 positions filled at the moment , and we want another 20 or 30 odd workers -- personnel to get the program into full operati on .

We've had hundreds of meetings concerning medical care programs and all that sort of thing which we hope to final ize once the Bill is passed in principle and the estimates are passed. However, the gross municipal expenditures will go down by that amount of money on a full yea r's program . MR. GRAY: Mr.

Speaker, knowing now, that the estimates will be passed, then we will get Royal Asse nt, can the Minister give some comfort to those who expect this additional help, as to an approximate date at least -- after losing a year I'm not going to discuss it any more- a year of hopes , anyway , expected it last year-- can he tell the House and the public as to when the machinery will be set up and in full 0peration? MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Well Mr . Chairm an, last spring we thought it would take us at least until October the lst to get our program really going if everything went very well .

We have lost a few months in here of effort in the field, and in our estimates and so on, but I can assure the Honourable Member from Inkster that we will proceed just· as fast as we possibly can, and that is our desire . That is what we want to do , and certainly -- I· can't make a specific date'; I think I would be foolish to do so in all honesty -- but we certainly do hope to have some .of this ass istari.ce coming out to those in need as soon as we can this year .

I would hope to put as much effort into it as we could, starting in right away , and up until the end of October, November, we should be starting to get some of these things going. But I don't think it would be fair for me at this time, with the tremendous change that will occur here, to give a firm committment . I really .••.•. . MR. L. DESJARDINS (St. Bonifa ce) : Mr . Speaker , we have at present many borderline cases, that is people that need help but that cannot qualify at the present. Perhaps if I give a July 23rd, 1959. Page 1261

(Mr . Desjardins , cont'd.) ...•. specific case, the Minister could answer me a little easier. I know of a young 10-year old girl who became quite ill; she was sent from one doctor to the other. It cost a lot for transportation, her mother had to accompany the child, she had other children at home and she had to have babysitters. They had quite a few operations .and, to make a long story short, there were a lot of bills -- hospital, doctor bills, transportation and so on. Now the father is certainly not well off - what we would consider well off, but he's always paid his way.

He owns and operates a very small store in a rural area, but if he has to pay these bills, well, he will be out of business. My question to the Honourable Minister, would be, when this Social Allowances Bill is passed, would that cover cases like this and if so, will this case - could these people apply even though the bills were incurred before this Social Allowances Bill came into force( When I am up, Mr. Minister, there is another question that I would like to ask.

There are some of the homes for the aged and infirm who have submitted their budgets , that is , they've asked the government to approve their rate per patient per day, and so far they ha ven't heard anything and they had to keep on operating. Now if the rate is not approved and if a lower rate is approved causing a deficit, can the Honourable Minister tell me how the operators of these homes can find and where they can find the monies to operate? . MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Chairman, all I can say to the first question is that this will depend on the need that is present on our staff and availability of same.

We certainly - my intention would be to have branch offices and so on to have centralized policy and to get our workers out into the field to which that woman applies , and is in receipt of some assistance now. She would certainly be on the list and as soon as she makes application it is our hope, depending how fast we can recruit this staff, to get someone to go and see her. I can only as sure him a determined effort and I would be only too glad if left the name of this party with the department, that we might take a quick look at it. Secondly, survey concerning the per diem rates in our nursing homes.

It probably doesn't come up under --maybe it should come up under this item. As I indicated earlier we did undertake prior to moving irtto the field of aged and infirm from 100% as we will, to look into the per diem costs and rates in our nursing homes.

Some of these are private nursing homes and so on, others are institutions I think he is referring to, and we started that survey last Aprii during the sitting, and have continued it, and rve just the other day got in the first recommendation on one of the larger institutions which will be discussed by the Treasury Board very shortly, and we are moving as fast as we can in this field. In fact I hope to have all the nursing homes surveyed very shortly.

Now the honourable member can un_derstand that, we were asked to give a flat increase of $5. 25 per day to every nursing home regardless of stari dards and regardless of types of patients , and we felt that we should have a good look at ..•.. MR . DE SJARDINS: Did you say an increase or bring the rate up to $5.2 5 a day? MR.

JOHNSON (Gimli) : Well the per diem rate as paid previously was $3 . 75 per day is all they were getting, and we felt that a uniform increase like that really didn't sound right to our budget department of the plan who had gone in there, for instance some homes have domiciliary patients, others have nothing but bed patients , and obviously the type of care is different and a per diem rate of a higher standard may be coming to that home in order to pro vide the care that we would like to see them provide. That is what we're working on now.

And as for deficits created in the past over many years we are ·also looking into a policy deci sion in that regard also. l\ffi . DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I meant only a deficit for this year because if these institutions have more or less counted on this increase of this rate and they've been operating using that to fix their budget, there might be a deficit for this year. And my first question, I certainly didn't intend to put the Minister on the spot, I was just using that as an example to see if those people could get help.

And another question that wasn't answered -- even if those bills were incurred before for those people if they're still faced with that -- it would be either that or get relief. I wanted to know if those could be considered also. MR. JOHNSON ( Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I just indicated that that is before us now.

That was ·brought to my attention the other day as the honourable member probably knows, and we think we will strike up a formula to assist these people as of from the first of the year; and in setting .future per diem rates to take a realistic look at their liabilities , that is in the type of Page 1262 July 23rd, 1959.

(Mr. Johnson (Giml i) , con t'd. ) .•.•. home that he is referring to . I must make it clear that many nursing homes have been doing a very excellent job, tremendous job, and this survey is revealing some very fine work. On the othe r hand there are some places where people are up and around and where the per diem rate should be looked at. But I can assure the honourable member that this whole matter has been receiving very close scrutiny from the budget team that I had survey this institution. MR . CHAIBMAN: Item 3. MR . DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, I don't want to keep this up, I appreciate the work that is .being done by the Minister and I agree with him in most of the cases but I still would like to know -- because tho se people are worried -- what will happen this year if they have a deficit, or hasn't there any decision been made on that until the Honourable Minister hears from his experts who are studying this? MR . JOHNSON (Gimli) : The payments made by us will be sufficient I'm sure to cover the deficit that they've been working under due to the cases of provincial responsibility that are in there since the first of January. MR.

DESJARDINS: You say the case of the provincial.

If I understand this right, cer tain municipalities are just waiting for the government to approve or set a rate, and if the rate -- some are already paying $5.2 5 -- and if the rate set by the government is lower I be lieve that the homes in question will then have to refund the money to such municipalities , and I understand that the City of Winnipeg has refused to do anything until they see what rate the government will set.· So if the government help they could still have a deficit from patients they have been keeping from other municipalities if the municipalities follow the rate that the government sets.

MR . JOHNSON (Gimli) : I can assure the honourable member that the budget' committee or the team that went into these nursing homes and did the study to which I have referred, and which they are just completing, are meeting this very realistically; that is they are taking all the per diem costs into consideration. But I am sure the honourable member will agree with me that a flat $5. 25 to every institution just isn't -- we can't do that when we're paying 100% of the care.

We have to go in there and determine what we should be paying them for the type of care that's being rendered and we will meet this realistically, and we will take into consid eration deficits as from the time we are committed to do so. I would inform the honourable member that most municipalities have had no choice but to increase their payments to $5. 25 a day, .and only the City of Winnipeg and the Province of Manitoba to my mind, have not increased this flat across the board until we had a look at this and. saw what we were doing. I think that's only common sense , and that's why we took thi s survey.

And I can assure the honourable mem ber that the per diem costs will be met if a deficit has been created because of paying them $3. 75 a day; if we feel that say an institution should be getting $5. 00 a day; and should have been getting it as from the time they made this request; that's exactly what we should do, and the City of Winnipeg and the Province of Manitoba are the only two who haven't paid this flat increase until they see what we're doing. MR . DESJARDINS: Mr . Chairman, I want to say again that I appreciate and I agree with the Minister that they are doing the right thi ng.

I'm not debating that at all. My concern was just that if some of the se homes have , maybe if they did they were not right in doing so , but if they are operating on the assumption that they will receive $5. 00 , well then they could have a deficit and it would be very, very hard to get money -- I don't know where they would get the money to pay for this deficit .

I doubt very much, I think that most of tho se people run ning these homes are very sincere, and I think that probably everything will be alright and the government will give them maybe not exactly what th ey're asking, but enough to pay; but trere's still a possibility seeing that we're so late in the year; there is still a possi bility that there could be a deficit, and without the Minister being wrong in the way that he operated. I didn't mean that at all. MR . N. SHOEMAKER (Gladstone): Mr .

Chairman, is it the intention of the -- or is there provision made in the Social Allowances Act to provide for doctor 's bill and expensive drugs , and if so , is there a limitation on each of them? MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Concerning, Mr. Chairman, the question of medical care, drugs and so on; yes, we have had preliminary discussions concerning the provision of the medical July 23rd, 1959. Page 1263

(Mr. Johnson (Gimli) , cont'd. ) •.•.. and other care to the recipients of public assistance and our senior citizens in need; and we have progressed quite favourably with these discussions in trying to study varirus comprehensive schemes and costs. I'm not at liberty at this time to divulge them but as the Act states, and as I have. stated, we are proceeding as fast as we can in this regard and I would say that I just don't know when, but in the not too distant future our plan would be to bring down a scheme with these various bodies .

We have met with some of the associations already; have done so over the past year and I think we will have a pretty good scheme for our senior citizens. MR. E. R. SCHREYER (Brokenhead): Mr. Chairman, the new Social Allowances Act, the purpose of it as outlined by the Minister is to meet need. And also as was outlined by him the cases were to be looked at on an individual basis , and that I think, to put it briefly, actually is the ultimate in any type of social assistance, and we certainly hope that it will work.

However, the reason I rise is to try and determine a little more explicitly just how one would interpret this word 'need' because the boundary between need and not being in need is certainly not sharp nor distinct. I would like to ask the Minister, and just to simplify it I would pose a hypothetical situation, would his Social Allowance Act and I presume he knows , because he is the one who is primarily the moulder of it.

Would this Social Allowance Act provide some type of assistance to a situation or a case in which you have a family, the fam ily itself actually not in need but just on that borderline situation where if events took a wrong turn to a very small degree, they would be in need. So if you have that situation where they are just above need and they have say a dependent, let us say a girl 17 years old, 18 years old who is a semi-inv.alid or actually who has been a victim of polio some years back; today let us say that she is comparatively healthy, nevertheless the parents cannot afford to send her on to school.

Now does that constitute 'need' in that family. Would anything be done in a case like that? Because if the parents did attempt to send that girl on to school, perhaps they could do so only by depriving themselves of just that amount of worldly goods that would put them in what one could properly call need. I realize that this is rather vague, but I do believe that there will be many situations such as this that social workers will meet in trying to ad minister this Act, and I would ask the Honourable Minister if a situation such as that would constitute 'need' in his

interpretation? MR. JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr. Chairman, almost like everything else there is a beginning and an end to everything. If I was a social worker called upon that case where I found a semi invalid polio victim otherwise healthy, not able to work, completely dependent upon her parents, who are in a very low income level and sacrificing something of their own in order to provide for the needs of the daughter -:.. I think the first thing there -- and this is where we have been sadly lacking for many years in our thinking I believe, and much better men than me believe -- first of all rehabilitation.

What is the chance of helping that girl out of her complete dependency; otherwise healthy girl but crippled to some extent. I would like to see her brought in, maybe through the auspices of The Society for Crippled Children, but any- way to our rehabilitation hospital for assessment, where we could find out if there was any thing we might do to help her in self care activity_. or help her through possibly an industrial workshop or give her some means of helping herself.'-- I think we all believe in that philosophy first and foremost -- should we find that we cannot assist this girl in any way.

But I think the last thing to do would be to send her home to a life of seclusion and so on with her parents. And again, if this. created need in the family, the parents were lacking the essentials of life as spelled out in the Act, and we felt in the department, that there was need created in the home because of this situation, I think that we would have to meet that need.

And I think, again, let's face it philosophically, we either try our best to measure up to the individual needs of the people of our province who are in need, or we have some blanket type of legisla tion which is across the board, which I don't believe, and my honourable member knows, it doesn't meet need. This is a challenge for the administration. We accept the challenge. We'r e going to do our best. But this is the way I think we would approach a hypothetical case of this type. MR. CHAIRMAN: Item 3. Pass . MR. ORLIKOW: Mr.

Chairman, it seems to me -- I try to understand what the Minister Page 1264 July 23rd, 1959. ./ /

(Mr. Orlikow, cont'd.) ...•• means when he talks about meeting need, but it does seem to me that since when we have a figure of $4, 684, OOO . 00 -- I realize it's an approximate figure , it's the beginning of a new program, we may not spend the whole amount or we may, as the First Minister said need more -- but it does seem to me that the figure must have been based on some kind of estimate and the estimate must have been based on some kind , some standard of allowance . Now I recognize that the allowances will vary depending as the Minister has said so often and so eloquently, on ·the basis of need.

Still it does seem to me that the members of this Committee ought to be given -- if they can't be given the regulations in detail -- that the Minister ought to be able to give us some illustrations, a few illustrations, a few hypotb'etical cases . Let's take a couple on old age pension who have nothing more than the $55 .0 0 a month each which is provided for under the legislation and they have no other means of assistan ce . They have rent to meet, they have food bills to meet, they have certain -- now let's not talk about maximum medical costs , but they have certain medical costs , certain drug costs .

Sure ly the Minister can give us some idea of what a few cases would be entitled to under the Allowances Act? Now the Minister said, and I'm not going to say .that he's wrong -- he said that this is one of the -- I think he said it's THE best Act in Canada, and it would provide a standard that the other provinces would look up to . Now surely he can give us some idea of what will be provided for when, I was going to say 'if' but I want to be fair to the Minister , when the regulations are .finally drafted. MR . SHOEMAKER : Mr.

Chairman, on the subject of means or needs test , I wonder if it is the intention of the government to amend the means test under the Old Age Assistance and Blind Persons Allowance Board, and also under the Total Disabilities Allowances Act. I know of a specific case in my constituency that seemed to be a little unfair. The wife of this farmer after a considerable amount of consideration and deliberation by the board, they finally accep ted her as a total disability case, and incidentally I was very happy to hear the Minister say this afternoon that there would be a more liberal

interpretation on the words •total disability' beca use I realize, too , that there are many partial disability cases in the province. In the past I think it hinged pretty well on whether you were able to feed and dress yourself and there are plenty of cases in the province. I know of 2 or 3 and there could be a good many more, in my constituency where they can feed and dress themselves but that is about the limit of what they can do . And in fact a lot of people have suggested that you had to have one foot on a banana peel and the other one in the grave to qualify, so I was very happy to hear that we could expect a little more liberal

interpretation of that Act. But in this particular case that I refer to , the farmer finally was able to get a total disability pension for his wife, but then of course he had to file a statement of his income at the end of the year which was quite all right.

But he had to look after his wife for severil.l years before she got the pension and as a result of the expendi tures, that he made all of his machinery become old and dilapidated and run down; his buildings became dilapidated and run�. down, and apparently the board said that as regards your income we take the amount of grain that you sold less gasoline, oil and minor repairs. That is they wouldn't allow depreciation on any machinery, buildings or anything else, and I don't see why a man should not be able to file a duplicate copy of his income tax to establish his income for the purpose.

It seems a little unfair to me that in this particular case anyway , that they would not allow any depreciation on machinery or any other item on the farm. Now on means test too , it seemed this afternoon as regard to bill No . 24 that in

Section 2 that there is a means test established there, or a needs test , when you're qualifying persons tha t" can get into these hostels or units at a figure of something like $2 ,4 00 .0 0 a year . Assum ing that the rental of the suite or the unit would be $40 . 00 a month, so that ''s $480. 00 a year , and 5 times that would be $2, 400 .0 0 a year , so that if you were making less than $2, 400 .0 0 a· year you could qualify for residence in one of the units there. So there does seem to be a little confusion as to what a 'means test' of a ·'needs.test' is at the present time. MR . JOHNSON (Gimli): Mr.

Chairman, the Honourable Member for Neepawa is having difficulty with the 'needs test' or the 'means test' . Now he says what about the means test con cerning old age ·ass istance and so on. All I am trying to say, and I have said it before, and I'll say it again -- and I refer the honourable member to Hansard where I even surprised my self with the excellent example I gave that day in introducing the Social Allowances Bill -- i� July 23rd, 1959. Page 1265

(Mr. Johnson (Gimli), cont' d.) .• .•• the fact that the means test is tied to income ceiling. Over a certain income you lose part of your pension. So often that discourages the person from making a little bit themselves. We say where there is need we should meet that need. The means test or the income ceiling in itself should not be a restriction against meeting need. I don't see the philosophy where you say if a person earns under a certain amount they shall receive a certain amount of cash.

If a person earns under $850. 00 a year such as in our neighboring province, the old age pensioner automatically gets $5.00 a month. Does that meet need? It does not necessarily meet need. We say we're better to not have that type of legislation but rather we should meet need. It's as simple as it sounds.

Now the honourable member brings up the question to get back to elderly persons' housilig, where he says -- " that the income ceilings here, we spell it out -- if the,person, if the rental of that room minus the services, if the person has more than 5 times the rental that they would not be acceptable in that elderly persons housing on the basis of need. In other words a person that has a huge income or a large 'income does, not need that type of housing accommodation.

Now he knows as a municipal man as well as I do, that many of our charitable institutions who have constructed excellent elderly persons' housing accommodation in towns and different districts, the board members are put on the spot sometimes to admit people who have handsome income, but these people are happy to be there with other old people and so on. But if we're going to be donating so much of our provincial consolidated fund and we're making such large donations to these institutions, we should put income ceilings on those people going in. This is what Central Mortage and Housing did.

We lifted that out of there. We •.....• them more generous means test than the $960. 00 and $1 , 620. 00 as was previously. Now as regards the member from St. John's speaking about the Minister giving him a few examples . I think it's spelled out in the Act, as I have said before, the regulations will have to be spelled out , but we need this little bit of elasticity and it' s pretty hard to write any legislation of this sort without having regulations to give this flexibility. I've tried to point that out previously.

If a couple only have $ll0. 00 a month and they apply, they're in need, and we assess it, we have various situations arise. That cou ple may be living in a small country town where they have an adequate home, but by the time they pay fuel , taxes and so on, they are in need; our worker will assess it on the basis of "well how much is food worth; what does -- do our experts say it costs to feed a person in a mont h. " Well they say the mothers' {ill owance regulation now is $23 . 00 per adult, times two $46. 00 for food, shelter, , rent. They have no rent.

This is what we mean by taking their assets into consideration. But they do have household expenses say they qualify for $5. 00 or $10. 00 there; clothing say $5. 00 a month $10.0 0 personal needs, getting down town once in awhile and other personal needs as the worker may assess $10.0 0, the total may come to , with heat and taxes, it may work out that they need a budget of $115 . 00 or $120. 00 a month. Then in that case the province can give the dif ference between the income and the needs of the couple and get 50% reimbursement from Ottawa. The same for old age assis tance .

In the City, I think one of the best examples I ran into myself was an old age pensioner in Winnipeg paying $25. 00 a month for his room, he was paying, in this case, he was paying $12. 00 for pills for some rheumatoip arthritis -- he did n't believe in the out-patient department pills which were available to him -- but nonetheless these helped him. He had, that gave him $37 . 00 a month and he was supposed to live on $18.0 0. Now the Honourable Member for St.

John's knows, that this is one of our biggest problems , because we have 4,200 of these people in the City of Winnipeg alone earning under $840. 00 a year and in inadequate housing. Our first step on that worker should be -- these are the people we got to help out of this type of housing, we don't want to be subsidizing poor housing. But supposing we do have to pay that rent,

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	26-1-32
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	26th 1st hansardpdf 32.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ec57977322e493c5b206ce643d6c973d321fa21c

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