Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 31A (26th Legislature, 2nd Session)

26-2-31a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Legislative Assembly Of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Speaker The Honourable A. W. Harrison .Volume IV No. 31A March 1, 1960 2nd Session, 26th Legislature Printed by R. S. Evans. Queen's Printer for the Province of Manitoba� Winnipeg

Tuesday, March 1s t, 19 60, 8:00P.M. Bill 28 (Hutterites, Mr. Shewman): Mr. Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . 1109 Mr. Paulley .... .•........... ; .. •......... · ...... •.. , • . . • . . . • • . . . • . • . • • • . . • 1111 Mr. Scarth • . . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . • . . 1115 Mr. Lyon . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . 1116 Mr.

Gray ...•. •.•........• .•. ..... : ..•.. ....•....•• · ...........•.•.... ..•. 1117 Mr. Weir . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . • • • . . . . . . . . • • . • • . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . • • • . • • 1118 Mr. Christianson, Mr. Cow an . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • . . . • • . . 111 9 Mr. Hryhorczuk . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . 1120 Second Readings: Bill No. 60, re M.F.A. Mr. Alexander ......... :........................... 1121 Mr. Paulley, Mr.

Alexander .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . • • . . .. .. .. .. • . • .. .. . .. . . . . .. 1122 Bill No. 67 (Mr. Klym), Bill70 (Mr. Molgat) . . .. . . . . . .. . .. .. .. .. • .. .. • .. .. .. 1122 Bill No. 61 (Mr. Hillhouse) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . . . • . 1123 Bill75 re Dental Technicians (Mr. Christianson) Mr. Stanes, Mr. Paulley ...... 112 4 .Bill 65 re Law Society (Mr. Hryhorczuk), Mr. Hillhouse, Mr. Stanes . . . . . . . • . . 1125 Committee of Supply: Health and Public Welfare, Welfare Division . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . 1126

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8:00 o'clock, Tuesday, March 1st, 19 60 . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. MR. CAMPBELL: Mr. Speaker, just at the time for the dinner adjournment I had men tioned the fact that on February 17 th, 19 48, this committee had reported, and again it may be interesting to note that at that time a procedure was adopted that isn't very often employed in this House.

As a matter of fact the Honourable the Attorney-General gave notice today that it would be used with regard to the report of the Rules Committee that it was received only today and that concurrence would be moved a couple of days later. Well that same procedure was adopted at that time, that was February 17 th, 19 48, if I remember the date correctly and I have been checking recently, and concurrence in that report was not moved for some time later.

As a matter of fact I believe it was the 9th of March before concurrence was moved - quite an interval in between-,-and at that time the Chairman of the committee moved concurrence and in spite of the differences of opinion that had certainly existed among some of the members, the concurrence was voted without a division. But then later on, again it was a short time later -- well it was a full month later -- in early April when Mr.

Renouf, a member of the committee, moved that this recommendation 4 that I referred to a little while ago, namely the one that suggested that the committee should again meet in the following recess and consider whether procedure should be established for giving an equity for providing an equity to the members of the colonies, when Mr. Renouf moved that motion arising out of the committee report there was quite a spirited debate. As a matter of fact 15 members spoke at that time and that motion was carried only on a division -- a division 32 in favour; 20 against. Mr.

Speaker, once again I might record that you and I were on the same side; our two friends here to whom I previously referred were opposed to us and to the majority. So the committee was re-established to sit again in the recess with its instructions being to consider a procedure whereby a formula might be arranged to provide for a member of the colony to acquire an equity in the assets of the colony. It was February the lOth in 19 49 that Mr. Laurie presented a brief, very brief report and this report unlike its predecessor is carried in the journals of the House.

Anyone can read it as of that date, 19 49 , and it said simply that the committee had been unable to complete its work and it recommended that again it be re-appointed, as a matter of fact it pointed out that quite a few meetings had been held but there were still people who wished to make repres entations on this matter that had been referred to it. and so it recommended that it be re-appointed and it asked for additional powers to those which it had had previously.

And the additional powers -- I won't read all the report of the committee but the concluding paragraph is "the committee is of the opinion that it should be given the following additional powers to consider the whola subject of (

a) the status of the Hutterians as citizens of Manitoba; (

b) the most effective methods which should be utilized for the education of the Hutterite children in Manitoba; and (

c) without being limited in any way by the foregoing, any other matters which relate to the Hutterite problem in Manitoba except such as have already been disposed of by a committee of this Legislature." Because you'll remember, Mr. Speaker, that certain of the matters had · already been di�posed of, namely the taking out of the Act of Incorporation those so-called ob jectionable sections. Well this report was received and, Mr. Speaker, you will probably remember particularly now that you are occupying your present position, remember that even after it was received that one of the members of the committee, Mr.

MacDowell, moved or raised the point of orde1· that the report of the committee was not in order because of the committee having delegated to a sub-commmittee some of its work. The decision was reserved on that point and later on Mr. Speaker of that day gave the decision that it was in order and was properly in possession of the House. Then the climax, if it may be so called, because at that time, and a short time later, Mr. Laurie as Chairman moved concurrence in that repoft.

Again quite a spirited debate took place with 16 members of the House taking part and the motion for concurrence was negative by a vote of 31 to 22 and it's interesting to notice, Mr. Speaker, that of the committee members, and they were the same committee members all the time, the 12 names I read earlier in the Session, they had been the same committee members all the way through these three different committee March 1s t, 19 60 Page 11 09

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd.) ...•• sittings and by the time that it was finally disposed of, exactly half of the committee members voted on each side. There were six for concurring in the re port and six against. So that's all the history that I intend to indulge in at this time except to say that to the best of my recollection although the manner in which the Hutterite :--the educatio0 of children is carried on in Hutterite colonies or villages may have come up at some time since. The question as a whole has never as far as I recall been debated again in the-way it was at that time. So, Mr.

Speaker, I have taken the liberty of giving this history which is complete though by no means in detail up to that time, thinking it might establish a background for the Honourable Members in their consideration of these bills.

And I would like to say that so far as the people who were opposing the --I shouldn't put it that way -- so far as the people who were raising the question and urging some restriction of the expansion of these colonies, I saw a good bit of them in those days and I would again main tain, still maintain, that never in their minds so far as I could interpret their thoughts was there any idea whatever of trying to curtail in any way the religious activities of this group, as indeed'l'm sure there wasn't in anyone else's mind at that time.

But even though that has settled the matter up to date as far as this House is concerned, it continued to receive a lot of consideration in the areas where there was some concentration of the Hutterite population. The report to which I first referred this afternoon, which is in possession of Clerk of the House, mentions that at that time the most of the colonies were in the two municipalities of Po rtage la Prairie and Cartier.

I think that's probably still the case that the majority are there but they have now grown greatly in numbers and have extended to a lot of other municipalities and as they continued to extend to other municipalities, and to some extent to extend in those two municipali ties as well, the local residents continued to hold a good many meetings on the subject. The Oakville, Poplar Point, Portage la Prairie, Elie communities continued to be quite active in urging some consideration by the Legislative Assembly of this question.

Then as they expanded to the Gladstone or Westbourne area, people from that area began to take quite an interest as well. And eventually, eventually and I haven't checked to find out what year this was but some of the other honourable members may know, eventually the Union of Manitoba Munici palities considered this matter and passed a resolution which urged the Legislative Assembly to cur tail the expansion activities of the Hutterites. Well that still wasn't done.

But what was done was that through the good offices of the Union of Mani toba Mun ici palities the representatives of Hutterian Brethren themselves and to quite an extent my colleague who was then the Attorney General of the province, this agreement that you see attached to this bill as

Schedule A was finally entered into. The government of that day was unwilling to put in legislation to restrict the expansion of the Hutterites but the government was not only willing but anxious to see the municipalities concerned and later on the Union -- the executive of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities acting on behalf of all the municipalities, conferred with the Hutteriali Brethren and made the best arrangement that seemed possible as between the two groups. And so that is the way as I recall it in whi,ch the agreement that is contained in

Schedule A came into being. And I think that's the right way to deal with this question. I commend both the Union of Muni cipalities and the Hutterite Brethren themselves for so amicably settling an issue that was at one time quite contentious and if you will note the

preamble of the

Schedule A, the agreement men tions that the Union has made representations to the Government of Manitoba for the enactment of restrictive legislation relative to the extension of the Brethren's land holdings in the province, "Whereas the Brethren being a peace loving people and anxious to maintain friendly relations with their fellow men, etc." I think that was the right way for an agreement to be arrived at and I think it's a reasonable agreement and so long as it's mutually satisfactory to both the muni cipalities and to the Hutterian Brethren I think it's good that it should be incorporated in these Acts.

Now I know that there are some who will say that the incorpor ation of the agreement- into the Act as

Schedule A, changes the status of this agreement from what it was before - a voluntary agreement freely entered into, into a statute of this province. Well, I think the answer to that is that it is still by agreement with the Hutterian Brethren that they are willing to ha,ve it included as

Schedule A. And I would think that it would be in the interests of -- I don't like to use the te� both sides because I don't think it's a case in which they take sides but it would be in the interests of both the municipalities of the province and of the Hutterian ·Brethren themselves that this clause, this agreement, this

Schedule A should not only be PagelllO March 1st, 1960

(Mr. Campbell, cont'd.) ••.•• incorporated in these Acts but that it should be incorporated into other Acts of Incorporation that are not before the Legislature at this time. I suppose a general Act would have to be brought forward in order to do that. I think that for those who are anxious to curtail the expansion and there are some, there are some who still are anxious to that done, I tbink it is to their advantage or to the advantage of tbe position tbat they take the agreement should be incorporated into the Act and thereby made a part of tbe Statute of this province.

I think it is to the advantage of the Hutterian Brethren that the agreement that they have entered into which I think is a fair one should be so incorporated so that there is no question about it being abrogated either with or without mutual consent at any time. And so the question comes, what about the present Act? Well certainly I am in favour of them going to the Committee. I have not been advised as to whether or not the people from the areas that have· always been greatly interested in this will or will not be attending the Committee.

My expectation would that they would be doing so, but I would think that if it is made plain that this

schedule is going to be carried through into the Act that it is binding along the terms in which I addressed a question to the Honourable the Attorney-General the other day, then I think that would not be very much dissatisfaction from their point of view but I am not speaking them because I do not know. The ones who would be likely to come are those who still that there should be some more restrictive legislation.

I notice that the Honourable ME�m,ber for Cypress, for whose opinion I h!J.ve a very high regard, except in one particular, speaking just this afternn on said that integration was needed in this province, that we were in of integration. I think that the most of people would agree that integration or assimilation whatever we wish to use as a term is a good thing in the most of cases, provided we don't that integration or assimilation, provided we let it develop by evolution not by legislation. still don't think that it's the right way to legislate on these matters.

And so Mr� Speaker, I think that -- certainly I am not going to oppose these bills going Committee. I think that this incorporation is only fair to these folks because I see no new granted here that anyone could claim are additional powers to what they have previously Now I'm not well versed in the subject and it may be that my reading of the various Acts has missed something but that, can be carefully gone into at the committee stage. And if there are no new powers I see no reason to deny them incorporation.

From tbe point of view of those who would like to restrict expansion then I think that the incorporation of the agreement as

schedule (

a) of the Act is a distinct advantage. Now, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should apologize for taking so much of the time of the House to give a review of this question but I thought it might be useful to the members of the House ue•�•,..,�., I know that some will still feel that tbe incorporation of that agreement into this Act as

Schedule (

a) is to some extent an interference witb the liberties of a particular group of people. suggest that an agreement that was freely and voluntarily arrived at and arrived at on the of good relations between the two groups and it is advantageous to all concerned that it should be continued, should be made a part of the statute law of the province and that it should even be extended to the other incorporations that are not before us at the present time. MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to say a word or two in connection with this matter of incorporation.

And I agree with the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition that it would be well worthwhile for every member of tbe assembly to read the report of the Committee he referred to which is obtainable in the library and also from tbe Clerk of the House. That is the document, Mr. Speaker, that I have before me at the present time. And the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition has given a fairly complete resume of what happened throughout this particular period. I would like to repeat the 4th recommendation of the Committee, first of all from the document itself.

My honourable friend had it, I believe, correctly but in order that there be no mistake I will read directly from tbe report of the committee. Item Number 4 deals with further purchases of land by the Hutterites and goes on to say that tbis Committee hesitates to make any recommendation to the effect that anything be done by legislation or otherwise which will interfere with what may be termed one of the basic fundamental rights of every person, the right to purchase land in Manitoba where and when he pleases.

This committee therefore, makes no recommendation relative to the matter of purchases of land in Manitoba by the Hutterites. And I think, Mr. Speaker, that that is a very basic recommendation. I think that the Honourable Leader of the Opposition rut a very correct observation when he mentioned Page 1111

(Mr. Paulley, cont'd.) .•••. that it appears in all of the discussions that have taken place in former years and I sincerely trust, even today, that the question of the religious beliefs of this group of people are not under scrutiny by us as such. But I do believe that there is a little bit more to the story of the question of the Hutterites and legislation than the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition has touched on.

I might say at the offset I have no objections at all to this Bill under discussion or any of the Bills dealing with the Hutterites and their incorporation going to ·committee for full consideration. But I must say., Mr. Speaker, that it seems to me that through the appendage of an agreement entered into as it is said, voluntarily, between the Union of Manitoba Municipalities and the Hutterite Colonies, that an attempt is being made to achieve an end which former legislatures of the Province of Manitoba would not agree to.

I also have on my desk a brochure titled the Hutterian Brethren and their beliefs, published in January 1955. The author was one Peter Hoffer and this was approved by the Committee of Elders of the Brethren. It is a history, Mr. Speaker, of the Hutterites in Mani toba and of Canada. I would like to make one or two quotes from the book because I think that they are very pertinent to the question that we have before us at this time.

It mentions on Page 7 that we were allowed to come to Canada as settlers in 1918 by the Federal Immigration Department of Ottawa and in consequence we established seven Hutterite Colonies in the same year in the Rural Municipality of Cartier where in 1820 another was established. It goes on to say now there are 22 colonies in Manitoba.

Then o� page 8 this question is asked; "Has not the Hutterian Brethren Church which was incorporated by the fourth session of the 21st parli ament in Ottawa in 1951 the same right as other Christian churches in Canada to carry out unhindered the obje ctives of its articles of association as set forth in its constitution and to exist and to perpetuate itself?" And then I come to page 15, and I think, Mr. Speaker, here is the crux of the matter that we have before us today. Wh erein on this page the

article refers to a resolution that was before the rural municipalities of Manitoba, Resolution 34, in which the rural municipalities of Manitoba sought to space Hutterite Colonies a distance of 40 miles from each other. The

article goes on to say that this is a form of disguised persecution, a method of molesting and banning, in its effect, a method of supressing a Christian religious order. Now, Sir, I had the honour during my years in municipal affairs, of at one time being an executive member of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities. And in that year a resolution such as that that I referred to in this booklet was before us. If I recall correctly at that time a majority of the members in convention rejected a similar resolution.

I know myself, as a member of the executive, protested on the grounds that we should not legislate or suggest legislation which would curtail the rights and privileges of any group or groups in the Province of Manitoba. It may well be, Mr. Speaker, that we do not agree with many of the internal affairs of these people. It may be that we do not agree with only the right of the male sex within the colonies to control the destinies of any colony.

It may be that we do not agree with the principle that on incorporation that _ any who wish to leave the corporation cannot take with them if they decide to leave the corporation, any of their assets. And I would suggest that if that is the question, that when these Bills come before us in the Committee, that we should take a very, very close look at those assets.

I agree with the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. when he says in respect of schooling that if the children of the Hutterite colony, and I think this can apply elsewhere as well, were joined together in a common educ.ational surroundings that it may be that the process of assimilation or integration may be speeded up. Apropos of that point, Mr. Speaker, I would refer back, if I may, to the report of the Committee of 1947,

whereas one of the observers to the Committee, a gentleman whom I don't know personally but I have heard of,a Dr. Marcus Book, a well known educator from Iowa, made an interesting statement to this Committee at the sittings on June 11th, 1947. His remarks were somewhat lengthy. The following were his concluding observations, and I quote: "So this is my conclusion.

I believe that the Hutterian colonies are undergoing a transition; I believe that they are on the threshold of assimilation into the great national scene, whether in the United States or in Canada; and I would say, yes, let us assimilate the Hutterites; but let us not assimilate them to Americanize them, for example, as I see them --let us not assimilate them to our social sins and our social evils; let us not assin1Hate them to our political sins or our political evils; let us not assimilate them to our economic sin, our economic evils; let us not assimilate them Page 1112 \ March 1st, 1960

\ (Mr. Paulley, cont'd.) ••••• into our religious apathy and the lethargy which we · so often show in traditional churches." My conclusion is this, gentlemen, out of this meeting and out of this controversy, if it is a controversy up he re , I have 5 points that I would like to use as a summat�on of my remarks . First, I would improve the school curriculum of the Hutterites. I wish that I could somehow have

part in that. I believe that there should be a change made in the Hutte.rite school curric ulum . I would make the outcome of this controversy a victory for religious freedom and for, I would say, good religious people everywhere. I would try to persuade the people of our own faith to strengthen their religious beliefs because we have sort of watered them down. I would say let us put out tl:!.e roots of our own lives deeper into those ancient landmarks I talked about. I would encourage the Hutterites to produce more and not less, for the government.

And finally, I would deal with this minority group because it will then be the more speedily assimi lated, that at least has been my conclusion and my finding. And I suggest, Mr. Speaker , that there is a lot in what Dr. Book had to say before the Committee in 1947 that we here in this assembly in 1959 or 1960 can agree with. Now then, I said, Sir , that having heard some of the discussions which took place years ago , or a few years ago , before the union of Manitoba convention having had an opportunity of taking

part in those deliberations , it appears to me that through this type of legisla tion that we are attempting to do through the back door which the government has refused to do up until this 1 time, beca use I cannot see that there is an alternative to that. Here in 1955 we had this treatise or brochure, from the brethren pointing out to the Legislative Assembly their objections. Then we find in the

schedule attached to the Bill just two years later in 1957 where a volun:tary agreement has been entered into. I wonder. I wonder really , Mr. Speaker, just how voluntarily it was entered into, beca use as has been pointed out by the Leader of the Opposition that for many years this had been a problem and had been discussed.

And in all of those years the government -- I should say to say it properly •. not necessarily the government, but the Legis lative Assembly had said, "No, we will not do it." And I wonder , and I ask myself this question, and I'm asking it of every member of this As sembly -- had we before us a Bill today not of the so-called voluntary nature of the agree- ment that was scheduled to the Bill, but a Bill to impose on the Hutterite people the conditions of that Bill whether we would support it? I think, Mr.

Speaker, as I look around the chamber, as I know the individuals who are members of this August assembly, I feel that their answer would be no. And so I say, Mr. Speaker , let us take a very close look at that agreement and the principle there; let us say this to ourselves, if the Act of incorporation itself were before us without the schedule, would we support it? And I think, Mr. Speaker, that we should divorce from our minds the question of this voluntary agreement because I feel in my own heart that the voluntary agreement is a means to an end. I question the legal right. I question, Mr.

Speaker the legal right of an organization of the type or constitution of the Union of Manitoba municipalitie s having the power to enter into .an agreement of this nature which eventually will become law if these acts are passed.

I would like to ask the Attorney-General of this Province to give me guidance on that particular aspect of the Bill because as is well known to every member in this as sembly, I certainly am not learned in the law except the former solicitor for the Town of Transc ona, namely John McLean, QC once told me that law was based on common sense, and if that is so it doesn't seem to me that it would be common sense tci allow an organization of which I was so proud to be a member , and a member of the executive, to enter into an agreement of this nature .

I think we should look very closely before we write into our statutes a

schedule of this nature which will become a law. And now, Mr . Speaker , I just want to say a word further or two of what seems to me some surpris ing attitudes in respect of the Hutterite colonies themselves. I have on my desk here a letter from ·one of the.bra nches of the champions of free enterprise, namely a branch of the Canadian Chambers of Commerce. On all sides we hear these organizations in their various branches that they are champions of free enterprise . I have before me, as I said Mr .

Speaker, a letter from one of those branches requesting a member of this House to discourage , to do his utmost to discourage the establishment of any further colonies of the Hutterites in the member's constituency, and they list five reasons , and here they are:

(1) There is a minimum amount of March 1st, 1960 Page 111 3

(Mr. Paullei, cont'd.) .•.•. good arable land in this particular area and to take out approximately 5, 000 acres for one farm would mean a number of smaller farms would be absorbed and their familes will move away.

(2) Two school districts would be insufficient, would have insufficient children to maintain a local school which could bring on financial and social difficulties on the remaining familes in the school district.

(3) The number of rural residents are decreasing ever year thus producing problems on the social level to th.e remaining residents and to the smaller villages. A second colony would only increase these difficulties at a faster pace than social changes could be made to facilitate the smaller rural population.

(4) Hutterite familes do not take an active

part in a community nor do they do business in the local town. On item four, Mr; Speaker, I would like to make this comment: It is alleged in this letter that the Hutterite colon ies do not take an active

part in· the community. Is it not so, Mr. Speaker, that in the non.:.Hut terite colony, particularly in matters concerning school affairs that the same situation prevails? Is it not true on expenditures of by-laws, by-laws calling for expenditures in respect of schools sometimes in the hundred of thousands of dollars that the non-Hutterites only to the degree of 10 or ·12% bother themselves to go out and vote?

Is it not true that in most or many of our muni cipal elections each year there are not sufficient interested candidates in the municipal govern ments of Manitoba to have an election or for our school boards? I think so. And yet one of the reasons that it is suggested tm.t there should be opposition to the further expansion or a further settlement of the Hutterites is because they do·not ta,ke an active

part in community life. How contradictory! And then in respect of the question of the business enterprises, when I received this booklet back in 1955 there was in serted a note -"Dear Sir, for your information there are in Manitoba 22 Hutterian Brethren communities, each community is a separate entity and owns approximately 4, 000 acres of farm land. There are in all 373 families in these communities. The land owned is approximately 240 acres per family,. an average of 40 acres per head. In answer, " and here is what I want to establish at this time, "in answer to the criticism that these communities do not buy lee ally, in 1953 the combined purchases of the Manitoba commu nitied were (

a) for doctors and medicine $72,444.72, a portion of this amount went to local doctors; (

b) for gas and oil $158,224, practically this whole amount was spent locally; for machinery and machinery repairs $306,778, this expenditure was made· entirely in the districts in which the various communities are situated; for groceries $150,467 spent largely in local stores".

And thi,s, Sir, was in 1953 seven years ago; and I would suggest that that, of course, has been considerably increased today. · And then number 5 in this letter complains or says that Hutterite colonies withs ufficient cheap labour can produce farm goods at a very reasonable cost and undersell the small producers who are marketing eggs, vegetables, small fruits and honey to the summer residents at the adjacent resort area. And I think that last paragraph or sentence that I read out is very pertinent when you consider that one of the branches of the champions uf free enterprise wrote or submitted this letter.

I say this, Mr. Speaker, and I have spoken longer than I intended to --I say let the Bills go to the Committee --let us consider all of the aspects contained therein but let us not be fooled by the

schedule that is attached. I am convinced that it is there only to achieve a pur pose which no legislature in the Province of Manitoba or no assembly has agreed to in the past; and I suggest again that if we as members of this Assembly are prepared to support and vote for the rights in our democratic Canadian way of these people to live a fruitful unfettered existence let us vote on the Acts of Incorporation on that basis and on that basis alon� MR . JAMES COWAN (Winnipeg Centre): Would the honourable member permit a question? MR . PAULLEY: Certainly. MR.

COW AN: You suggested that through the schools we might have -be able to work out greater assimilation and integration of the Hutterites. Now, to what extent --said it would speed it up. To what extent, after them being in Canada for 42 years, has there been assimila tion or integration with the. community? I don't know very much about them and I would like to know. MR. PAULLEY: I would say in answer to that Mr.

Speaker, and I believe the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition touched on it to some degree, and in this brief I think the answer would be contained in the --and I don't think that this was one of the recommendations that was finally adopted by the committee or the House, referred to by my honourable friend the one in Page 1114 March 1st, 1960

(Mr. Paulley, cont•d.) .•••• respect of educati on . --(Interje ction)-- Pardon. Well if it was it was never I don't think processed insofar as I can find into the law of the province, and it had this to say and I think possibly this might answer your question. And with your permission Mr. Speaker, I would just read that recommendation respecting education wherein the answer to my honourable friend's question will be contained. "It appears to this committee that the situation as r'3gards the school training in Manitoba of the Hutterite children is not satisfactory.

If the Hutterite children attend the same schools as other children in the province and receive the same training will it not result as Dr. Bock said in the assimilation of the Hutterites into the great national scene? The isolation of the present Hutterite communities will in time disappear. This committee recommends that the same standard of education be enforced relative to the Hutterite children as is enforced relative to other children in Manitoba.

It is recommended that the functions of the school administrator, the school inspector and the attendance officer be vested in a single official who should have jurisdiction over the Hutter- ite colony. It is further recommended that on account of the unusual conditions which exist every effort should be made to enduce the Hutterite communities to utilize the common public school system, 11 and I don't think that that was fully carried through into law. MR .

COW AN: Well would you propose that they be require d to go to the public schools in the villages ins�ad of keeping them in their own schools in their colonies as they do now? MR . PAU LLEY: I think that's a rather complicated question but I would say this in answer to it. It may be that in our wisdom we should consider that. MR . SCARTH: Mr.

Speaker, I shall be indeed brief as I realize that time is going on, but first of all may I express my personal gratitude to the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition for the most informative address which he has just delivered to the House, and I Sir wish to say -- to point out that bis address was in my opinion entirely free from politics, entirely free of brass, but he was giving the House the benefit of his experience for the better guidance and consideration of the problem before us. And I like those who have spoken here tonight, Mr.

Speaker, am heartilyin favour of this and the other bills going before the Committee, the law amendments committee, so that they ·may have the deepest consideration in there and when those who are sponsoring the Bills can be there to speak up for themselves.

Another thing Sir, that I am happy to believe that of the 57 members in this House there is not one bigoted enough or biased enough in his own particular religious views that he wishes to step on the other man whose religious views are not the same; and so Sir, whatever happens to any of these Bills I think and I hope it will always be thought by the people of Manitoba that we have all acted absolutely impartially and done what we-thought was best to be done.

Sir, there is one point in connection with the Bill which strikes me as a unique posi tion as a practicing lawyer, and frankly in all my career as a lawyer I have never seen a similar proposal put up to me as is put up in these Bills. Under

Section 2 of the Bill it says "The objects of the corporation are (

a) to promote, engage in and carry on the Christian religion, Christian worship and religious education and teachings and to worship God according to the religious belief of the members of the corporation. That Sir, is most commendable and some thing in which we all believe. Then (

b) to engage in and carry on farming, stock raising, milling and all branches of those industries and to manufacture and deal with the products and by-products of those industries;" and then the- next two sub-sections go on enlarging the scope of their industrial manufacturing endeavours.

Now Sir, if any group of any religious organi zation came before this House and sought incorporation to carry on religious activities that would never be denied; and if any other group irrespective of religion, creed or colour came before this House and said we seek incorporation to carry on farming or manufacturing or industry, that Bill would not be denied.

But the problem which bothers me at present and I may be wrong, is why do we have on the one hand the religious aspect and the next right into industry in the same corporation, and Sir, as I say I do not understand it, I ask in all sincerity that every member of this House consider the Bill from that aspect. Let it never be said that we have ever lienied any group all justice and every power to which they are entitl ed but let us at the same ti:ine see that we are not stepping into a path which is abnormal or unusual and where we do not know exactly where we are going.

Sir, as I understood the Honourable the Leader of the CCF to say, I understood him to indicate that we should not be against free enterprise or the beliefs of these peoples. I am in thorough accord with him in that regard but March 1st, 1960 Page 1115

(Mr. Scarth, cont' d.) •••.• as I say, if we give unusual powers to any group irrespective of what its religion might be or anything else let us know where we are going and why. MR. LYON: Mr. Speaker, I rise at this stage in the debate when perhaps all that pro fitably can re said on the principle of this Bill has already been said and perhaps much better said than I could have enunciated it in the first place.

I think at the outset I should -- and I would want to do this as an individual and certainly as a member of the government and a mem ber of this House to thank the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition for his detailed and I think tremendously interesting exposition of the background of this situation which we have before us on second reading of this Bill tonight.

I have fallen heir to files and material which were left behind when the former government left office and I had perused those files and that material and had arrived at much the same conclusion as had the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition with respect to what the history of this problem has been. Only I think he added to it with colour and with the grace with which he very often adorns the debate in this House some of his personal experience and some of his recollections being on that committee when it sat in 1947 and so on.

And so I do think that we are truly indebted to him for this instructive exposition which he has given us this afternoon and tonight because I think it is essential for an understanding of what we have before us tonight. As I have already mentioned there is not too much that one can say after having listened to the debate thus far. I think the general statemen� can be made that the Bills before us do not attempt to incorporate greater powers for the colonies than they were heretofor given under previous legislation.

I think that can be pretty well accepted as a general statement although in some particulars when we get into committee these matters can be discussed. There are other matters of interest , the question of taxation, tbe question of success ion duty in relation.to these colonies and so on and so forth, all of which I again suggest can be disposed of more adequately at the committee stage. We do find in this particular Bill and in its sister Bills which follow it, reference made in · the Bill to

Schedule "A" , an agreement entered into between the Union of Manitoba Municipalities and the Hutterian Brethren, I believe it was in April of 1957. Now it is not my duty nor do I feel competent at this time and on the spur of the moment to give a well-rounded and thorough legal exposition of what this agreement involves_ as to whether or not the parties were competent to enter the agreement and so on and so forth.

Suffice it to say that I think that it was an agree ment which at the particular time it was entered into, and I like to have the feeling that it was entered into voluntarily by both parties, because of course if there was no consensus or if there was no agreement between the parties or a desire to enter into an agreement, the agreement wouldn"t be worth the paper that it was written on.

But certainly at the time it was entered into it seemed to provide some amelioration of the situation which was then again apparently coming to a head at the instance of different groups when the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition has mentioned and these groups being represented through the Union of Manitoba Municipalities.

Now we have had two very interesting discussions about this agreement, one from the Honourable Leader of the Opposition suggesting that perhaps this agreement should be incorpo rated in other acts which already exist on our statute books, and of course a different view from the Honourable the Leader of the CCF in which he suggests that we should search our consciences before we pass the present bills with the agreement in them in the form in which we find them, and being a true lawyer Mr. Sp:� aker, I can say that there is a little bit to be said for both arguments .

Because I think that the argument raised by the Honourable the Leader of the CCF must certainly have crossed the mind of all members of the House when they were considering this Bill; I think they must ask themselves the question as to whether or not, if the restirctions contained in that agreement. were placed before them in Bill form whether or not they would vote for it -- and I think in most cases the answer would be no.

But then turning of course to the argument of the Leader of the Opposition and I think there is much merit in it. ·I think on the other hand we can say this, that the government of this · province certainly is not -- the present govern:nent or tbe members of this House -- let's make it broader because we're not speaking of it in any narrow political sense at all -- the members of this liouse are not parties to this agreement, they're not parties to the agreement in any way at all. The agreement was entered into between the Union of Muncipalities, their president and then secretary and the Hutterian Brethren.

The Hutterian Brethren have now seen fit by petition Page 111 6 J March 1st, 1960

Lyon, cont'd.) ••••• to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor and by petition to this Legis to ask us to pass certain legislation. They have seen fit of their own volition to include that legislation reference to an agreement which it must be presumed they entered into vuLurLLaruv. And I think it is on that basis that we must approach it, at least until we get to the vv.•u•.u•••cc stage and can perhaps examine evidence to be brought forward by their solicitor or to be brought forward bY: the Union of Municipalities which might suggest that the r-n·ntv•a-ru situation would 'exist.

And so I think that speaking as an individual and that is what I doing at this stage, speaking as an individual, I would most certainly favour the passage of Bill at second reading; the approval of it in principle because I feel as an individual that is nothing wrong with the Bill in principle, they only ask for incorporation of an existing colony, the main purpose for which is to permit these colonies to deal with land and to transfer and to have proper dealings in the succession of land the same as any other group would in province.

The question has been asked and repeated, does the wording of sectic)n 3 satisfactorily in corporate the terms of the agreement in

Schedule A. I believe that that was the question put by Honourable the Leader of the Opposition. Well depending upon that degree to which you wish incorporate the agreement between the union and the Hutterian Brethren, certainly I would say that it is incorporated if it is at least acknowledged for the first time. This agreement is legal acknowledgment in this Act. I think we would have to stretch the

interpretation of the incorporation to say that the agreement -- the legislature would be assenting to the agree per se, because if you reach each bill you will see that in the relevant

section which applies the corporation may, subject to the terms of this agreement made between the Union and Brethren, purchase, acquire, take, hlive, hold, exchazge and so on, land. There again stress the point that it is the Huttertian Brethrell. who have brought this forward in their own I don't know of any member in this House who asked them to put it in. I'm sure that mover of the Bill didn't ask them to put

Schedule A in in the form in which it appears. They are bringing this forward of their own volition.

I still admit that we must take cognizance how of what the Leader of the CCF says and when we come to the committee stage we must then we must determine whether or not this is in agreement which - we can only presume at stage it's an agreement which they want to have incorporated as part of their act of incor- Now as to the suggestion of the Honourable Leader of the Opposition that this agreement attached to existing statutes I think that is something which would require consultation between the two parties to the agreement before this legislature could make any knowledgeable or form any knowledgeable opinion about his suggestion.

I don't think there is too much else that I w ish to say at this stage, speaking as an indivi member of the House except to reaffirm what has been said, I think, by most speakers tonight. this is a pro � ce which prides itself on the variety and the numbers of different persons of rent racial backgrounds which we have here. I spoke only yesterday on second reading of a , an anti-discrimination Bill with respect to public accommodation of this very fact.

I think all of us, holding in mind the principle that we have in that Bill, share the same ideals and princ:ipJ.es with respect to any other minority group in this province and certainly it is not the desire nor do I think it's the wish of any member of this House to inflict upon such a group oner or unconscionable conditions which we would not want to face were we in the position of those _,,��-:. ... groups.

And so it is with that spirit that I think this House will give approval to these at second reading and it is with that spirit that this House will deal with these Bills when they reach committee stage and the final third reading and passage stage in this House. MR. MORRIS A GRAY: At the outset I'd like to tell my honourable friend from River Heights that religion and industry does not interfere. I don't think it would do the honourable r any harm that before he goes to court to read a

chapter of the Bible. So the question the religion has been mixed up with industry I don't think that the honourable member should anything against them. My 1 eader and the Leader of the Opposition has made a very good case, to which T. agree, and the reason I'm taking up for a few minutes the time of this House is that I happened to be in the House in 1947 when the history-making Bill at that time was as out lined by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. I supported it then and I'm going to support him now when I say I support is the principle of them leading a life of their owu and as they please Page 1117

(Mr. Gray, cont'd.) ..••. as long as they do not interfere with the law of the province and the law of Canada and they're entitled fully to their way of life. And now the question of the so called assimilation -- I recall that 60 years ago during the heavy immigration to America from Europe, the melting pot, and at that time there was quite a discussion ther e for years.

A very famous writer from England .••.• has then proposed the best thing would be for those hundreds and hundreds of different races, creeds, religions; to become American; in other words put them in a melting pot and let it come out, pure Americans. They failed at that time because you know what happens when you put in in a grinder everything that you could see before your eyes. And they have found out since that the culture that each individuiu im migrant brings to this world in the way of culture, tradition, training, experience, makes life much more interesting.

And all the groups, different groups as we have in Winnipeg, about over 50, with their participation in the life of the community plus maintaining their own creates a wonderful flower garden; and I don't think that assimilation or a melting pot will come about, at least not in my life, but. I'm almost certain never, because the more they are here and the longer they are here they'll become better Canadians and also maintain their own traditions, ceremonies and what have you.

Now this group of Hutterites have been allowed to Canada legally as immigrants and have a perfect right to carry on the way they do and after all if certain sections of the province wishes to refuse them buying of the land why do they sell it to them. After all they're not expropriating it; they are buying and paying for it, perhaps a good price, and if they're such patriots and they are afraid that a certain group of people who work hard and maintain their own traditions and their own life and wants to get more land it's up to thl3m not to sell it, but once they have it they are perfectly at liberty to do it.

The

schedule attached in my opinion I think is an insult; I think this is done for a purpose -- just my opinion, I may be wrong -- that it was done for the purpose of pacifying certain elements in this province that the Hutterites will not expand as far as they are afraid they will. So naturally there is an agreement with the Union of Municipalities that they cannot buy any more land until they get their approval. So why wouldn't they get their approval, if there is land vacant, farmers leave, there is a decrease in farm settlement.

Why woUld the Union refuse to sell them the land and have it cultivated rather than being neglected. So from all points of view I don't think there should be any opposition at all. But there is a few things that do worry me and I think that could be cleared up in committee. Number 1 is that the women of this world in a democratic world have fought for years or a century, to get equal rights, and here where they stili feel that they are not as yet entitled to have the same rights, they are eliminating them from public duties. Apparently they feel that all their duties are at home.

There is something which is not very favourable but I don't know what we can do about it. But one thing worries me a little bit more and this is that this Bill includes industry. �In other words, under the Bill they could open up factories, shops and banks, and what-have-you?

And perhaps won't hire anyone to do the work because they have large fami- " lies and then it interferes -- probably it will interfere with the labour markets if they are going ahead with it -- if they have the power to do it -- and secondly they will perhaps have to pay a fair wage as exists in this province -- and the second thing is more important is that - I understand, and this came up in 1947 and the Honourable Leader of the Opposition will remember it -- is the question of anyone who wishes to leave the colony and probably spend 10 or 15 years there, cannot get anything out of his labour for the time he has been with the colony.

I think if these two things could be rectified or explained satisfactorily. I don't think that we need a

schedule and I don't think that we need to oppose any sections of the Bill. MR. SPEAKER: Order. The Honourable Member for Minnedosa has been trying to get into this debate for some time, maybe we should ..•. • MR. WALTER WEffi (Minnedosa): Mr. Speaker, I have been trying to get into this debate for about three-quarters of an hour now or an hour. I was just taking for granted the fact that a fellow my size was against me and you couldn't see me for the rest of the big fellows around here. Now unfortunately I haven't got the same degree of Scotch blood in my veins that some of the members of the House have.

Unfortunately also my knowledge of the scripture is a little more limited than that of the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition so I am not going to attempt quote any either by reading it or from memory. .. Page 1118 March 1st, 1960

(Mr. Weir, cont'd.) ••••• There was one point that he mentioned which I would like to correct just for the sake of the record and that is with reference to the income tax d the colonies. I made it a point to check with the income tax office in Winnipeg and they told me there that all the colonies in Canada are income tax exempt, under se ction 62 of the Income Tax Act. The only thing they did say is "Don't ask me where" because they didn't know.

They gave me a name and an address in Ottawa and I attempted to get the information there , again the only information that I could get was that the colonies are tax exempt. 1 just draw that in to correct what was said by the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition when he said that he felt or he understood they were subject to corporation tax.

Now since I have been attempting to get on my feet, and I think everything thaf I intended to say has gently been knocked on the head by somebody else that has already been up, but if I was- a member of the other side of the House , from what I have seen so far in this session and the previous session, I would probably say it all over again. But I'm not going to - I'm not going to. I would just like to point out one further point that I think is the big problem as far as we 're concerned here. Now I �:mtto point out definitely that I have no feeling against the Hutter ian religion or any other religion.

I am all in favour of religion. I'm all in favour of every religion. I have nothing against any agric ultural organization or any business organization of any kind. I think that if any group of people want to be incorporated in any manner they should have the opportunity to be incorporated.

I do think, however, that this issue could be solved if two .Bills were brought in in place of one -- if one Bill could be brought in to incorporate the Hutterian Brethren as a religious group and stop there , and bring in another Bill to incorporate the Hutterian Brethren as an agricultural organization to go out and farm their farms and raise their produce or whatever they like . Now I don't know. I have no notion of opposing this at second reading • .I want it to go to Committee .

I want it to have a very frank discussion from everybody that will come and talk to us but I do think that it would be a lot better and a lot easier and there would be a lot less discussion; also I don't think that anyone would be able to point the finger of discr imination at any of us if it was brought in in two Bills in place of one. Thank you, Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: •. .• •• for Portage la Prairie want to speak? MR . CHRISTIANSON: Like the Honourable Member from Minnedosa, Mr ..

Speaker, everything I was going to say has been said but I would like to add this, I have known and done business with almost all of the Hutterite colonies in the Portage and Cartier municipalities at one time or another over a period of the last 15 years. I know them well . I respect them. I admire their piety and I admire their industry and they are generally making a very good con- ' tribution to the welfare of the country.

However, I do have certain reservations when we regard the effect that they have upon the community and the community life around them and the effect that they have had over a period of the last twenty years. I would also , Mr. Speaker , like particularly to commend the Leader of the Opposition for his very fine and statesmanlike state- t ment of the history of this problem as he has known it over the years. I think his statement was comple te , factual and extremely frank and fair. l.Vffi. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to express a couple of thoughts on this subject.

The first is this, many members of this House are particularly concerned about the free- dom of the colonies to purchase land : that is one freedom . But I think we should also be concerned about the freedom of the individual s, the men and the women, the human be ings who make up those colonies.

Surely as legislat ors , as defenders of freedom we should be concerned with the freedom of the people in those colonies and they should have the freedom to vote, they should have the freedom to own a cow or a bicycle or a car , they should have the freedom to get some compensation for their work, they should have those freedoms and other freedoms that one could mention.

I understand that they can vote if the leader tells them that they can but ordinarily speaking he doesn't tell them that they can vote and ordinarily they don't vote and they ce rtainly don't participate in the life of the community or help to govern that municipality where they might be living. Surely we should be concerned with the freedom of the people , not just the freedom of the corporation, and we must also think of the fact that the freedom of � corporation is restricted to some extent in Canada. We don't let corporations buy up every thing.

From time to time we take steps to break them down. -The rubbe r footwear corporation, the wire arid cable corporation, we seek to try and stop monopolies and we shouldn't be too March 1st, 1S60 Page 1119

(Mr . Cowan, ·continued) . . . . . afraid of stopping monopolies in other ways , with regard to business and with regard to owning the land or a large portion of the land in a municipality . Surely we should be concerned with stopping monopolies; and then with regard to income tax surely we should be concerned with fairness too . Is it fair that we have the farmers in the ordinary course of events growing their produce and having to pay income tax and competing with chaps across the road that don't have to pay income ta x.· Surely we should be concerned with fairness in all its aspects and not just some .

And under Sect ion 6 of this Act you will see that they can pass by-laws for the good administration and government of the corporation that are not contrary to this act or to the laws of this province. They can pass under that very restrictive by-laws upon the persons who ma.tce up the colonies and they should be required like other corporations to file those by-laws . Othe r corporations must file their general by laws . They must be approved by the Provincial Secretary and amendments must be approved, but that is not the case here .

They should not be given these special privileges that other corporations don't receive . It is quite true that under Se-ction 15 the Lieutenan t-Governor-in Council may require the m to file accounts or by-laws but I understand that that requirement ,h as never been exerci sed . And it has been sa id that we pride ourselves on our racial background. Yes, we do and we should pride ourselves too an th e freedom of the people in our province and we should be looking at that question as well. And it has been sa id that why do people sell to th em, they don't have to sell to th em , that is quite true .

But it's just the same way that people sell to the big business in thi s country, the monopolies, because they ask the highest price and because they are available, they have the money there to pay the highest price. I think we should be concerned though , gent lemen, particularly with the freedom of the individual and not so much with the freedom of the corporation. MR . HRYHO RC ZUK: Mr. Speaker, I, like the member from Minnedosa, am somewhat squea mish about repea ting myself or repe ating what somebody else has said, but there are times when repetition is necessa ry, and J.'ise.

In fact it' s sometimes better to repeat yourself than not to say anyth ing at all. Insofar as the Hutte rites in the province are concerned I wasn't acquainted with them Mr . Spe-aker, we have no colonies up in our part of the province but I did get an opportunity to become acquainted with the m when this agreement was being negotiated and I want to sa y Mr . Speaker that they impressed me most favourably. I had several discussions with the Elders of some of these colonies and they impressed me as being sincere, intelligent and God-fearing .

They impressed me as being the type of men that aside from some of the re servations which we have heard here are as fine citizens as there are . Now, insofar as those res ervatio ns are concerned Mr . Speaker, after all is sa id and done I think that we ,when it comes to a matter of religion, only . answer to our Crea tor and no one else,a nd I think tha t's how it should be . As to the matter of assimi latio n and integrati on, Mr . Speaker, in the past there were times when we doubted that certain groups would integrate or assimi late and we have found out that we were wrong.

Those same groups have today become some of our very best Ca nadian citizens and they're proud of being Ca nadians and I think that ot hers are proud of the fact to o. I conscientiously believe Mr . Speaker, that the time will come when the Hutterite will be part and parcel of Ca nadianism accepted as such . As to whether this particular agreement was voluntary or otherwi se I want to say Mr. Speaker that I was in the midst of these negotiat ions and to the best of my knowledge they were arrived at voluntarily by eithe r si de ..

As to whether this particular agreement has been incor' porated into the bill voluntarily or othe rwise I can only say that to the best of my knowledge ,

Section 3 I believe it is that refers to that particular agreement was put in there by the Hutt erian colonies themselv es . I think that we would make a big mist ake Mr . Speaker if we did not pass this bill or bills on second re ading and I thiiL\ we'd make a furthe r mistake if we did not bring it back here and give it third re ading because we will never impress anyone, the Hut terites or anyone else, by force, by compulsion.

I think that we will gain much more by showing tolerance and ki.'1dness and I think by the way we behave towards othe rs so they will behave towards us in the end and I do believe that if we try and understa nd these people and try to grant the ir wishes with tolerance and kindness as I have mentioned, that there is far . more hope of them coming around to seeing our point of view than if we follow the othe r course . Page 1120 March 1st, 1960.

MR . SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR . SHEWMAN: Mr ..... MR . SPEAKER: The honourable member is closing the debate; MR .

SHEWMAN: Speaker, I'm in the very fortunate position tonight, in presenting these bills to the House in one or two respects, I'm very fortunate.! never reme!T'ber in my experience in the House when a bill or bills had been so thoroughly discussed - discussed in this House and the thought that I have that these bills should go before law amendm ents comm ittee and therefore I would suggest that we pass the other bills as individual bills instead of going through the same discussi on that we 've had on this one bill . Mr . Speaker put the question and after a voice vote declared the motion carried. MR.

SPEAKER: Bill No . 31. MR . SHEWMAN : Mr . Speaker, I wish to move, seconded by the Honourable Member from As siniboia that Ilill No . 31, as act to incorporate the Grand Hntterian Brethren be now read a seco nd tim e and passed. !'viR . SPEAKER: I might inform the honourable member that the Member for Assiniboia is not in his seat. MR . SHEWMAN: The Honourable Member from Hamiota. - Roblin, Roblin I should say, I 'll get it right after awhile. Mr . Speaker presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried . Mr . Shewman presented the following Bills for second reading: Bill No . 35 ,

an Act to incorporate The Poplar Point Hutterian Brethren. Bill No . 36 ,

an Act to incorporate The Rock Lake Hutterian Brethren. Bill No. 37 ,

an Act to incorporate The Rose Valley Hutterian Brethren. Bill No. 32,

an Act to incorporate the Hillside Hutterian Brethren. Bill No . 38,

an Act to incorporate The Spring Valley Hutterian Brethren. Bill No . 34,

an Act to incorporate the Oak Bluff Hutterian Brethren·. Bill No . 33,

an Act to incorporate The Lakeside Hutterian Brethren. MR . SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question ? MR . CAMPBELL: This is probably the final motion in this regard. I just wanted, following what the Honourable Member for Minnedosa said to give the source of the informa tion that I gave to the commit tee . It is contained in the report that was presented to the House on the earliest occasion. On Page 20 of that report of 1948 it says this, "The Hutterite land is assessed and ta.xed on the same basis as other farm land in the municipalities .

They pay all municipal and school district taxes which may be levied against their holdings . For income tax purposes each colony is classed as a co rporation." I wanted to make that clear because the Honourable the Member for Minnedosa appeared to indicate that I had given so:me wrong information to the com mittee . It may be that the situation has changed since that report was written but that was the basis of my statement . Mr. Shewman presented Bill No . 29,

an Act to incorporate The Brightstone Hutterian Brethren for second reading. MR . SPEAKER: Second reading of Bill _No. 60,

an Act to incorporate The Manitoba Federation of Agriculture . The Ho nourable Member for Roblin . Mr . Alexander presented Bill No. 60 for second reading . Mr . Speaker presented the motion . MR . SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? Those in .... MR . ALEXANDER: Mr . Speaker, the purpose of this bill is actually three-fold . First of all it has provision to disso lve the original incorporation that was incorporated under the Manitoba Federation of Agriculture .

Secondly, it incorporates a new organization to be known by.the same name;and thirdly, it transfers the assets and the liabilities of the dissol ved organi zation to this new one. And the main reason fo::: this coming in at this time is because of the change in mem bership and change in the organizational-set-up of the new Manitoba Federation of Agric ulture .

As most members are possi bly aware the original me mbersh ip qualifications, or the way in which members got their direct members hip in the Manitoba Federation of Agriculture was through their members hip in affiliated local co -operative associations and it was felt that that worked fine originally because the co-operative was largely and possibly exclusively a rural one and that is not true. or doesn't hold true today. So therefore March 1st, 1960 . Page 11 21

(Mr. Alexanqer, c:mtinue d) .•.•• the membership quali fications or the methods: of the individual farmer having membership iri the new organization is through a direct membership basis. There is also provision made for corporations who are in sympathy with the object of this new organization to join it. So we have two separate means or two separate groups holding mem bership in this new orga..tliza tion . First of all the individ uals joining up on an individual basis and secondly those corporatio:ry;: which wish to do so.

Now corporations wr..ich will be joining' or can join now are those who held membership in the original organization and secondly those organizations which receive a two-thirds majority vote of the board of directors of the organi zati on.

I'd like pos sibly now to give a brief outline of the objects of the Manitoba Federation of Agriculture to promote the well-being of the people of rural Manitoba, to represent its mem bers before government bodies, to assist in formulating, promoting legislation for agricultural policies and to develop and promote an understanding of the position of agriculture in the economy of Canada and also to encourage and develop wherever possible, programs of mutual assi stance and self-help. I would like to state Mr.

Speaker that this bill will be going to the Private Bills Committee and the Chairman of the Board of Di rectors, Mr. Ransome, I under stand will be there along with counsel to answer any questions that any representations might have or any members of the committee mig ht have. MR. PAULLEY: I have no objections at all 1:9 the bill going to the committee . I wonder whether it might be advisable for it to go to the committee on agriculture because it deals with a corporation pertaining in general to agriculture rather than the private members' com mitt ee .

I might say that there may be some questions raised in the committee , there seems a similarity in names, it might eventually be confusing . But that matter .of course· can be considered and discussed at the commi ttee. MR. WAGNER: Mr . Chairm an I wonder if the honourable member would like to answer the question whether in his own opinion it wouldn't be better that Manitoba Federation of Agriculture join the Manitoba Farmers' Union since they are going on direct membership, and be one. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the questi on ? MR. ALEXANDER: Now, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member is closing the debate. MR. ALEXANDER: I don't think it makes too much difference which committee the bill goes to as long as representation or people that will be making representation know which one it is going to .

It is a private member's bill touching on agricultural matters but possi bly the private members bill will be the more appropriate one; and the simU arity in name , I might point out the fact that until 1957, I think it was, it was called the Manitoba Federation of Agriculture and Co-operation and the Co-operation was dropped at a convention of the organiza tion because of the fact that they didn't feel that with the new emphasis or the increase of the urban co-operatives that they should keep it and I think there was a co-operative association set up itself at that time to represent co-operative s and for that reason 'to-ope rative"was dropped from the name but there was no change in the actual. membership or regulations of the old associati on.

Now as to the question of the Honourable Member for Fisher, my own personal opinion as to whether it would not be advisable for these two groups to get together, I think by the bringing in of this Bill poss ibly as he noti ced that there is in some ways a little more close ness in thought in the organization of the two groups but I would poss ibly like to say this , that it seems apparent that this group who were basic ally the first farm organization and the main farm organization group in Manitoba until 1950, still feel that by having a separate organization that there's something worthwhile that they can do and I'd like to say this that my ovm personal opinion -- I'm not concerned whether we have one organization in Manitoba or five farm organi zations , as long as we have all of them doing what they think is conscienciously right, all of them doing what they think is best.

As long as they're all working for what they feel is the best in terests of the farmer of Manitoba, then I think we can have, and rest assured that we will always have good farm representation in our farm organizatio ns . Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carried. Mr . Klym presented Bill No . 67,

an Act to incorporate the Elmhurst Golf and Country Club for second reading . Mr. Molgat presented Bill No . 70,

an Act to incorporate Ste. Rose General Hospital Page 1122 March 1st, 1960.

for second reading. MR. MOLGAT: Mr . Speaker, actually it's a pleasure for me to present this Bill to the House on behalf of this group of ladies . There is existing in Manitoba, a charitable organiza tion known under various names , the Grey Nuns or the Sisters of Charity or in French Les Soeurs Gris or Les Soeurs de charite. They came here originally in 1844 at the request of the Bishop of st. Boniface and have been very active in charitable works of education since that time.

They have institutions in many locations in Manitoba and since their beginnings have expanded throughout the western part of Canada as well. They have institutions in Saskatchewan and Alberta similarly. Now they were orginally incorporated in 1872 under

an Act, at that time, called Les Soeur de Charite d' Hospitale General de St. Boniface and this was

Chapter 29 in the statUtes of Manitoba of that year . Since that time the Sisters as I say, have. expanded in the many different loo ations and now they're coming to the Legislature asking that four different locations be separately incorporated, and these are the St. Boniface General Hospital, the St. Boniface Sanitorium, and the Tache Hospital for Chronic and Geriatric Patients. Those have been introduced by my colleague the Member for St. Boniface and will be presented for second reading by him later . I'm pres enting only the one, the Ste. Rose General Hospital.

There is as well,�anol;4erbill tobe presentedbyor already presented by my colleague, the Honourable' Member for Carillon with regards to another institution. I understand it's a similar type of bill. At the moment then the single incorporation for the St. Boniface Hospital covers all these institutions. The desire of the Sisters of this organization is to have each one of the institutions separately incorporated. They feel that this would be easier from the standpoint of control within their organization. Rather than having the St.

Boniface Hospital here control the operations of the other three which are distinct. and separate locations and in general a different type of work as a matter of fact, that it would be preferable from their standpoint to have each one on a local basis and a separate incorporation. They feel at the same time that for people who will be dealing with them whether it be the government or pri vate individuals, that then they would be dealing with a single group in each case in a single location and it would make for easier handling. So on this basis, Mr.

Speaker, I respe ctfully ask that the House pass the Bill in second reading and forward it to the Private Bills Committee. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? MR. FROESE : Mr. Speaker, co uld he further enlarge on

Section 11; just what is intended under

Section 11 ? MR. MOLGAT: Mr. Speaker, I believe the questions with respect to a specific section, my understanding is that on second re ading, we are to discuss merely the. general principles. I have no objection to answering any questions but I leave it to you if it's in order I shall answer, if not, I suggest that it be taken up at the time that it is in committee . MR. EVANS: Mr . Speaker, the honourable member would agree that the usual proce dure woiild be the best and that at the time of committee we discuss the details of the Bill in the individual sections.

I think that would be the most convenient for the House in general. Mr . Speaker prese nted the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carried . Mr . Hillhouse presented for second reading Bill No. 61,

an Act to incorporate The Corpora tion of the Synod of Manitoba of The Pre sbyterian Church in Canada. MR. SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question? A MEMBER: Naye. MR. HILLHOUSE: 'You asked for it! Mr.

Speaker, the purposes and objects of the corporation are to undertake and to assist in the work of church extension of the Presbyterian Church of Canada in Manitoba and to that end, the corporation is vested with certain powers, these being to guarantee the repayment of money loaned to congregations of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, to lend money to congregations of the Pre sbyterian Church in Canada and to borrow money upon such securities as the executive committee determines or without security therefore, to issue debentures, invite the public to subscribe for debentures or other securities, hold land necessary for the purpose of the corporation, receive gifts and donations, invest the funds of the corporation at the discretion of the executive committee and re ceive monies from a congregation of the Pre sbyterian Church of Canada in Manitoba, and as trustees, invest these monies for that corporation.

The directors are to act without fee and all dividends and all profits of the corporation are to be brought back into the corporation for the furtherance March 1st, 1960 . Page 1123

(Mr . Hillhouse, continued) ... of the objects of the corporation . Mr . Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote , declared the motion carrie d. Mr . Christianson presented for second reading of Bill No . 75,

an Act respecting Dental Technicians . MR . CHRISTIANSON: Mr. Speaker, this Bill is a companion bill to one coming in which contains amendments to the Dental Act. This bill has been petitioned for by approximately 100 Dental Technicians presently working in 11 dental laboratories here in Winnipeg, one in Brandon and one Dauphin. At the present there is no formal or ordered way for a person to take training as a dental technician. That phrase is defined here as one who on prescription of a registered dentist makes or repairs any denture or dental appliance.

Any one who wants to become a dental technician goes to work as a plaster boy in one of the labs and works his way up, usually at the discretion of his employer. Starting sala ries are usually around $40 per week and skilled men working on partials or doing porcelain work make well over $100 per week. The Bill makes provision fo:r; a board of management to regulate the affairs of the Associa tion and an advisory board which also has two representatives from the Manitoba Den tal Association to advise on matters of common interest .

These boards will set up the syllabus and training schedules of the apprentice and will provide for examination s. and licensing of gradua tes . The Act, I feel sure Mr. Speaker, is in the best interests of the dental health of the Province of Manitoba. MR . ST ANES: Mr. Speaker, on this subject, I can fully understa nd the desire of the dental technicians to have the auth ority to administer their associa tion .

But I think it would be only, too, fair to make the members aware of the fact that their only customers are the dentists and the dentists feel very strongly that the restrictive trade should be preserved. In this particular clause I feel that we are impinging upon a very important principle and I feel that we should look at this thing very closely in committee . MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Speaker, in connection with this Bill, if I may be permitted, not speaking quite directly to the principle involved although I can do that if the House insists on it, but in the presentation of the second reading of this Bill, Mr.

Speaker, the Honourable the Member for Portage la Prairie that introduced it, also informed us that there was a companion bill pertaining to the Dental Associa tion itself and we also , Mr . Speaker have a bill before us pertaining to the incorporation of an Associa tion of Dental Technicians and I would like to appeal to the House or to the government to make sure that if these bills are given second reading that they meet together in Law Amendments so that we can consider the merits or demerits of them all at that particular time. Mr. Speaker put the question . MR. EVANS: Mr .

Speaker, in answer to the question of the Leader of the CCF Party, I think it' s quite clear to all of us that the committee would be in charge of its own rules and would establish its· own order of business . so I know of no intention at all on anyone's part to impose any artificial sequence of these bills or grouping of them , which would make it impos sible to discuss them in anyway that the Law Amendments Committee would like to discuss them . MR . PAULLEY: I would like Mr .

Speaker, if I ma y be permitted to point out to the Honourable Leader of the House than on a similar occasion in respect of the same items, it was agreed upon generally without the committee meeting that that would be done and hence my suggestion tonight. I might say that the Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce was not sitting on that side of the House at the time . It was agreed. MR . ROBLIN : I think that that would be quite an improvement . MR. PAULLEY: With him over there ? MR. SPEAKER: Order ! MR.

EVANS: Ironically, I don't know whether even the Leader of the CCF Party fore sees any particular or practical difficulty. If it's a general assurance that we're not going to impose any artificial rules upon the considera tion of these bills. We can give him that assurance . A MEMBER: Mr . Speaker .. .. MR . SPEAKER: The honourable member is closing the debate . MR . CHRISTIANSON : Mr . Speak er, If I might be perm itted the Member from St . James Page 1124 March 1st, 1960 .

(Mr . Christianson, continued) .•. raised the principle_.the question of principle . · I believe the principle involved in this Bill is exactly the same as the one already established in the relation ship of the opticians and oculists and I think perhaps the druggists and the doctors . Mr. Speaker prese nted themotion andfollowingav oice vote, declared the motion ca rried. MR. SPEAKER: Second reading of Bill No . 58, adjourned debate, the Honourable Minister of Health and Public Welfare. MR. JOHNSON(Gimli): Mr. Speaker, due to the unavoidable absence of the sponsor of this Bill, the Honourable Member for St.

Vital, and in view of the nature of my remarks, I would beg the indulgence of the House in allowing this matter to stand at this time . MR. SPEAKER: Order stand. Agreed. Second reading of Bill No . 65,

an Act to amend The Law Society Act. The Honourable the Member for Ethelbert-Plains. Mr. Hryhorczuk pres ented Bill No . 65 for second reading . Mr . Speaker pre sented the motion. MR. HRYHORCZUK: Mr. Speaker, I think that the Bill is self-explanatory but I might just add a thing·· or two to the explanation and that is that pres ently under the Act all app oint ments of Queen's Counsel are made by an order of the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council.

Now it so hap!Jens that it becomes one of the duties or is one of the duties of the Attorney-General to make the recomm endations to the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council as to who he feels are fit and proper persons to receive the app ointment, and speaking from experience, Mr .

Speaker, it can be pretty embarrassi ng when you have the Law Society and the legal profession and the benchers and so forth, arguing that the person , if he is a barrister and is an Attorney-General should receive the app ointment of Queen's Counsel and you find yourself in the position as Attorney-General to be recommending yourself to the Lieutenant-Governor for an appointment. Now what this does, Mr .

Speaker, is to have the Attorney-General, at any given time if he is a barrister, have him app oint it as Queen' s Counsel without the necessity of it going through the usual channels of being an app ointment by way of an order-in-council. I think it's both fitting and desirable that this particular amendinent receive a second reading and be passed on its third reading as well. MR. HILLHOUSE: Mr.

Speaker, I wish to thank the Honourable Member for Ethelbert Plains for using my name as seconder of this Bill, as I feel that this is an amendment to the Law Society Act, which has been needed for a long time and I have great pleasure in supporting it and commending it to the House to be passed unanimously . MR. ST ANES: Mr . Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. I think it's a very fine thing that the Law Society has recognized in this very tangible form the outstanding contribution that has been made by its members -- members of the profession.

I think it's pa rticularly fitting that a member, the Honourable Member holding the position of Attorney-General, one of the peaks in the legal -- professional legal career, to be recognized in this way. However, I do rise also, Mr . Chairm an, to. point out that the legal profession has no monopoly on public contribution, contributions to our society as a whole. We have ma ny, and many of us can think of many people who have made great contributions to our local life, our provincial life and our national life and they very often have not even got a 'thank-you' for it.

With this thought in mind, which I've had in mind for several years, I was very interested, Mr. Speaker, to see an

article in one of the weekend ma gazine s a couple of weeks ago on the Ca nada medal - about the Ca nada Medal, and was most interested to find that it was passed by an order-in council in 1943 in Ottawa and the medals were struck but none of them have been awarded. I think it's a thing that does requife our attention; something has been neglected in the past years and something I think, which should be remedied. MR. GRAY : I would like to direct a question to the mover of the Bill. If this Bill is passed and I hope it will be unanim ously, does the .Attorney-General get his Q.

C. appointment immediately or does he have to wait for next year when the others are appointed? MR. HRYHORCZUK: I believe, Mr . Speaker, the an swer to that question is that once the Bill becomes Law that the app ointment will go through at that time . A MEMBER: Is there a celebra tion at that time? MR. HRYHORCZUK: I think we should ask some other person in the Legislature other than myself. Mr. Speaker presented the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carried. March 1st, 1960 . Page 1125

MR. SPEAKER: Second re ading of Bill No . 51,

an Act to amend The Margarine Act . The Honourable Member for Wellington. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I wonder in the absence of the honourable member if this item could be allowed to sta nd? MR . SPEAKER: Order sta nd. Committee of Supply. MR . EV ANS: Mr . Speaker, I beg to move, seconded by the Honourable Attorney-General that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty . Mr . Speaker prese nted the motion and following a voice vote, declared the motion carri ed. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for st.

Matthews please take the chair . MR. CHAIRMAN: Department 8 (b) 3- Welfare Division . MR. JOHNSON (Gimli) : Mr . Chairman, I think in view of the large item here under Welfare that I should make a preliminary statement under the heading of Welfare Division as I anti cipated in my opehlng of the estimates . The honourable members, I hope Mr . Chairman that I won't talk so long that I delay my passa ge of these items but I do feel that I must bring certain features of the estimates here to the attention of the House and there are some rem arks I wish to make.

I would say that the three main breakdowns in these estimates are the public welfare service.s, the old age assis tanc e and blind persons' allowance, and the disability allowances . They account altogether for an estimated .expenditure in the year of almost $12 million, an increase of roughly 1. 9 over last year's estimat es . The main item in these estima tes is, of course, the provision of .social allowances . As the honourable members of the committee are well aware the proclama tion of the three basic groups was ma de effective on February 1st, of this year .

Now in my brief experienc e I have found that it is difficult to very often interpret welfare legislation, not only to the general public especially when it is proclaimed in sections but even to the members of the House and I realize that the members of the committee are faced with the same problem and I'm sure they want to be able to tell their constituents who make enquiries or ask questions about the provisions of the Social Allowances Act •.

For your information I would like to break it down into the three basic groups which I mentioned above as being proclaimed on February 1st . · Now in -- first of all there' s the Aged and Infirm Group . Now in here we have two sub groups . The first are all the old people residing in nursing homes and old folk's institutions where the municipalities have been paying 80% or they have been reimbursed 80% . These now become, of cour se, the complete provincial responsiblity and we have notified the municipalities and the nursing homes to this effect.

The second group in the .aged and infirm is made up of those who are mentally or physically incapacitated or ill to the extent that they require some one else to look after them and who are not necess arily in a �=sing home or in an institution . I would like members to think of the aged and infirm group in those two categories that were under the proclam ation as of the 1st.

Secondly, are the neglected children, of cours e, com mitted by the courts on the 1st where there was a maintenance order against the municipality and where the province was reimbursing the municipality accor ding to the 40/80% formula over one mill . These are a complete provincial responsi bility as of the 1st of February and the municipalities have been notified to that point . The third group are those over 65 in need of cash allowance . What parts of the Act were not proclai med at this point ? First of all were the group I re�erred to as the Mothers' Allowance type .

These are the families where the man is sentenced to gaol for over a year where the family has been deser ted between one and four years and the families of the unmarried mother with two or more children. The proclam ation as of February 1st does not cover these people under 65 without children, also who claim physical or mental dis ability and who are unemp loyable but not sufficiently ill to require some one else to look after them . This pa rticular group will tie in later and has not been proclaimed at this time . Now it did not cover Indians under the pre sent proclama tion.

I simply want to say in this regard that our discussions with the Federal Government to date indicate that making the pro vision of social allowances to Indians on rese rvat ions and in the remote areas of the province is something that will have to be worked out carefully and thoughtfully both as to administration and to financing . It is noted that

section 3 of the Social Allowances Act state s that the Page 1126 March 1st, 1960 .

(Mr . Johnson, Gimli, continued) ••..• Government of Manitoba may make such arrangements as are necessary to ensure that residents of Manitoba do not lack the basic necessities . It will also be noted that in

Section 12 of the act, that Manitoba may enter into an agreement or agreements with the Government of Canada . While the Unemployment Assist ance Agreement provides for 50% federal participation, we have seen sufficient precedents that we believe that the federal contribution should be lOO% in certain areas . This whole matter of making arrange ments to ensure that these people do not lack the basic necessities is very definitely bound up with our community development programs for people of native ancestry which I discussed under the executive division.

Now our program of community development has been discussed with the federal Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the Honourable Mrs . Fairclough and she has authorized her regional officers to work out with my department, the details of how the Federal Government might share and assist in this particular program . However, I think it is very important to .. state that apart from those Indians living on reservations and in the remote areas of the pro 'Vince where they come directly under the Department of Indian Affairs, I have instructed my staff to apply the provisions of the proclaimed

section of the Social Allowances Act without discrim ination against Indians. This means, for example, that th ose people who have moved into our cities and towns and who are in need because of disability or age or the other factors in the act, are to be treated just the same as other Manitoba citizens . I would like to go back again, Mr . Chairman, in talking of the aged and infirm group, for whom provision was proclaimed on the 1st . This provision is so important that although it has been discussed in the executive division I think it bears repeating.

These are the people now in our institutions who are, as I descr ibed, unclassified as to medical assessm ent in some cases, and where standards of medical care and nursing care are minimal and yet at best often misunderstood by those making the placements and those operating the homes . The study of these homes which was conducted for me by the Hospital Plan states very clearly that a number of patients could be moved out into boarding home care or home care and to their advantage, and they'd be much happier. With the provisions proclaimed on the 1st this can be done.

There is a second most important point I would like to make and that is that the provision of a Social Allowance to the sick or disabled who require someone else to look after them will bring real assistance to a group that has caused great concern and numberless enquiries to the department. These are the group of the most serious cases rejected by the disability assessm ent panel or the Act. This situation has been an aggravation to me since I became Minister and I know it has been the concern of every member of the House and committee.

I will now be able to make the provision required by these people who are so badly off and I reiterate this that if they require someone else to look after them even though we are unable to make a grant dis ability allow ance. It is natural that members of the committee will want to ask questions and want to make comments about the new regulations under the Social Allowances' Act. I would, therefore, like to outline once again before we go into the estimates the government' s policy and intention re garding this important development of our public serv ices .

Now members of the commi ttee will recall that when I spoke on the second reading of the Social Allowances Act at the last session I stated that it was the government's intention to meet need where need existed. I also stated it was the government' s policy and intention to individualize to meet the needs of the individual case rather than to fix flat amounts which would be provided as supplements to everyone below a certain income regardless of their needs . We realize, therefore, Mr .

Chairman, that if we're going to meet needs we had to bring into our employment and welfare services a number of people to deal with each of these applications and to look at the costs of livL."lg of the individual pensioner . We realize that within certain broad rules as laid down in our regulations this staff under the director would have to be given discr etion in trying to relate the provisions of our regulations to the needs of individual cases .

In other words, we recognize that the policy of the government in trying to meet needs could only be put into effect in a fair and equitable way if first of all there were certain basic guide rules which are in effect the regulations and, secondly, if there was an adequate staff organized to deal with the case on its merits . Immediately the Act received the approval of the House at the last session, the govern ment authorized a full and extensive review by the Orgamzation and Methods Branch staff of Match 1st, 1960 . Page 1127

(Mr . Jobnson, continued) .... . the Division of Welfare Services and of the Pensions' Branch - that is organization methods were called in to assist with this problem before the Act -- as the Act was up at the last session. With the full co-operation of the Civil Service Commi ssion and the Organization and Methods Branch of the Treasury Board many hundreds of hours of time were spent by these groups and our senior staff in maldng recommendations to re-organize the administration so as to take on the staff required within the broad aim of being able to give individual attention in these cases .

These studies proceeded during the balance of August and in the months of September and October and were formalized by Order-in-Council reorganizing the establishment of the two branches early in November . From that point on the directors of these branches have been recruiting, hiring and placing the personnel under my general direc tion to get organized just as soon as possi ble in order that the Social Allowances Act could be proclaimed. I think members of the committee will understand, Mr .

Chairman, that the hiring of staff, the recruiting of staff, the setting of salary schedules, the ordering and pur chasing of equipment, the finding of space, the hiring of space, the devising of forms , the introducing staff, in-training staff, drafting procedures, drafting regulations, just to mention some of the ad ministered preparation required, certainly can't be done overnight and can only be done with in the limits of the time, energy and ability of the staff. This is in no way intended, Mr. Chairman, as an apology for the delay in the implementation of this Act.

My instructions to the staff were clear -- get this underway as quickly as you cari but make as sure as you can that we have a basic minimum of staff and organization to do the job. At this point I would like to tell the Committee that the senior staff of the Division of Welfare without exception as well as that of the junior staff there for the past six months worked on these problems far beyond the normal call of the duty of civil servants and I certainly want to thank them publicly for this.

I know that they have to continue to put maximum effort forth for many months to come and I intend to see that they get every support necessar-Y to help them administer and make real this vital social legislation. I can say, Mr. Chairman, that of the 176 positions established in the division of Public Welfare as of February 25th, 141 positions were occupied. Recruiting and placement in staff is going on and will certainly have to continue for the next few months. · I would like to make one or two comments, Mr . Chairman, about the regulations them selves under the Act.

These were, as you recall, were. distributed a little over a week ago and I think the basic statement in the regulations as contained in sections 61 which requires the Director of Public Welfare to take into account the circumstances of the need of the appli cant and to.estimate in money terms the total cost per month of the basic necessities and to pay an allowance based on the difference . It has been said a number of times, Mr. Chairman, in this House and in public that members can see no difference between the needs test and the usual type of income test . The difference, Mr .

Chairman, is very clear and it is stated right in this section. The administration is required to consider and to measure the needs of the applicant and to set them out as a basic consideration. If there are any means these are sub tracted from the needs and the allowance is granted accordingly. Now this is easy to contrast with the so-called -- with the means test where the administration is given no right or direction to consider the needs of the applicant.

He may have heavy expenditures for drugs, medical care; he may have a sick or ailing wife and require housekeeper services; he may already have extremely high expenditures on rent and yet none of these things are considered. Under a means test all the administration is directed to look at the real or computed income of the applicant and if this income is below the set ceiling which is uniform for all cases, an allow ance is automatically granted. If the income is above the ceiling as we know, no allowance is granted regardless of the. needs of the person .

I think that has been som ethi:ng I wanted to enunciate very clearly. Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak very briefly on the reorganization of the Pensions Branch and this has been a fundamental change in the organization of the Branch designed to try and deal with pensioners more promptly and in a helpful courteous and individualized manner as much as possible . Previous to the reorganization of this Branch we had five pension investigators under the Pensions Branch.

As the honourable members know applications and annual reviews from pensioners were secured in very many cases through the use· of ag reps and nurses and sanitary inspectors ''in the health units . Many cases can be shown of protracted Page 1128 March 1st, 1960 .

(Mr . Johnson, continued) .. . delays in dealing with the circumstances of the pensioner and often with resul ting hardship to the pensioners by the inability of the Branch to have an adequate supply of steel staff. In the reorganization of the Branch with this help that I've told you about earlier provided by Cabinet in November, proVision was ma de for 18 field investigators seven of these have been employed bringing the staff to 12, and in the next few months the complemen t of 18 will be reache d.

In the number of pers onnel we have , ·a t the present time for instanc e, with the 12 investigators it means you have more clerical staff needed to handle mail and as we get more, these 18 investigators we'll be able to cut down on our clerical staff. And in the meantime as I say, the clerical and stenographic staff who were handling these cases by what I might des cribe as remote control are being replace d. by these investigators or pension welfare workers .

I might say at this point that the Welfare worke.rs that we have to go and take appl i cations from pensioners and the pensions people -- the investigators of the Pensions Branch are going to be entrained in that both welfare worker and pension investigator will be -- can take applica tions for both, of cour se . It is part of the plan or organization for the Department that these workers in the Pensions Branch will during the course of the next two years be inte grated into the staff of the Divi sion of Welfare Services -- one composi te body .

You noted in these estimates there is a slight reduction in the old age assis tance to the amount of $45, 000, I believe . This is based on our experience of the past few months where the anticipated increase in case loads didn't take pla ce . As members of the committee will recognize, the expenditure unde r this heading is an uncontrollable one in the sense that if a sufficient number of people apply for assi stance and qualify under the Act and their regulations , the assist ance must be granted. It is our best estimate that the expenditure in the coming year will be down $45 , 000 . Now members will note, Mr.

Chairm an, that there's a substantial increase in the money provided for disability allowances . I think I can say without fear of contradiction that this pro., gram of disability allow ances,a joint Federal-Provincial program despite its very real value to those who quali!:Yj is nevertheless one of the most bothersome ones to myself as Minister, to my Department and to members of this committee . The root of the problem lies in the Federal regulations which stringently restrict the allowa nce to a very narrow definition of total and perm anent disability.

The result has been over the years that rejected appl ications have had the sympathy of large numbers of the com munity who recognize that the person is sufficiently disabled to be unemployable or to be unable to manage their own affairs and yet have been refused this allowance . Now this matter was fully rehearsed and discussed last fall at a meeting of the Federal-Provincial Advisory Board and the Ministers of all the provinces met with the Minister of National Health and Welfare in Ottawa and I am looking forward to an improvement in these regulat ions in this sessi on, I hope, in Ottawa.

In the me antime, and for the future definite relief is already available to these cases in the new Social Allowances Act which has already been proclai med. Those who are totally and perm anently disabled and who have been rejec ted and who are in the care of some other person will in most cas es, I am. sure , be eligible for the provincial social allowance . In this respec t my staff have diarized these rejected cases for disability allowance and they may even now -- they are now I think some of them even being processed unde r the provisions of this Act . In concluding this statement, Mr .

Chairman, on the Welfare Division I'd like to call the attention of the House again to the estimate of $6, 050, 000 for Social Allowan ce s. Now this is based on the knowledge that the full caseload for the program would not be reached during the first few months of proclama tion, and would not in fact be likely reached until perhaps a year to a year and a half after the Act is proclai med.

For example, while the case load and expendi ture for the month of April may be two or three thousand additional cases, the month of July five to six thousand cases it will be April '61 probably , that you'd be in the area of ten thousand additional cases . It is only fair to state therefore, Mr . Chairman, that the expenditure for this item during the following fiscal year will in all likelihood show an increase -- a sizeable in crease over the amount requested for the pres ent fiscal year . I think, Mr.

Chairman, that in introducing these estimates I just wanted to outline as I have briefly that those sections that proclaimed so that the honourable members would have this clearly . Secondly, those sections that are not proclaimed but some indication of the progre ss that is going on, the reorganiza tion of the department which has taken place and I would try and answer certain questions as we go through here . Page 1129

MR. PAULLEY: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the Minister for his statement in respect of welfare. I join with him quite sincerely in the tribute that he has paid to the memb ers of the staff in the Welfare Division. I and I'm sure the rest of the members of the comm itt ee at any time that they have had any dealings with the Old Age Pension Board, or the . Deputy Minister, or any of the people within the Welfare Division, have found them to be most co-oper ative and ready to assist at all times, so I join most heartily. in the tribute tha:t has been paid by the Minister to the staff of this Division.

And I can also appreciate the difficulty that the Minister and the Department have had in putting into effect this program as rapidly as the Minister and the rest of us had hoped because we recall, of course, over the last year or so that it was antic ipated that this program may have been ill force before this time. I have one or two questions that I would like to ask of the Minister, one of them that I'm sure that all of the people of Manitoba are vitally concerned with.

Now that the government has proclaimed some of the sections of the Social Allowances Act a natural question would be, when does the Minister or the government anticipate that the balance of the provisions of the Act will be proclaimed? I'm sure that's of interest to all of the people of Manitoba. I'd also like to ask of the Minister, he made reference just before he closed his opening remarks to the $6 , 050, 000 in respect of social allowances -- This is an increase of approximately one million four over what it was for the period ending March 31st, 1960.

Now as I understand it that the item of six million four eight four of a year ago did not take into consideration any contributions that the municipalities were making at that time. It was purely a provincial ex penditure -- the figure of last year of $4, 684, 000. And because of the fact, as I understand it subject to correction, that the government in those portions of .the Act which they have now proclaim ed they are relieving the municipalities of the charges which the municip alities former ly had that we have an increase of one million four approximately to the $6 ,0 50, 000.

I don't know if the Minister would be able to tell us what the net amount in addition to the estimate of the provincial autho rity last year that the municipalities contributed to this particular item on social allowances. I'm sure we'd be greatly interested to see how the amount which we have now before us in the estim ates as a direct provincial contribution would compare with last year 's item plus the amount for this particular item that was contributed by the municipalities before the Act came in to proclamation.

Now, then, it appears to me that in some respects notwithstanding the Minister's state ment that this is based on need rather than means, that it doesn't wholly hold true because . notwithstanding the fact, Mr. Chairman, that in former years in respect of old age assis tance at age 65 there was as the Minister so properly pointed out to the comm ittee, an investigation into financial resources.

And after that investigation having been made set against a stated figure as to the contribution from provincial authority of so many dollars, the fact still remains , I think I would be correct in saying that notwithstanding the amount of contribution that was made in respect of old age ass istance from the joint coffers of the Province and the Dominion, it was still a factor that insofar as additional contributions were concerned they could be obtained at the municipal level. And thereby, I think to some degree at.least, establishing by virtue of that, that there was no real ceiling.

I'm sure my friends on my right will agree with that contention and we of our group always maintained that it should be done at the provincial level as I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition will agree on that point.

So I say that notwithstanding - (Interjection)-- yes, very co-operative sometimes-- that notwithstanding the new approach, the basic result is still somewhat simi lar, and I'm led to believe that more than ever when I read the application form for the new social assi stance allowances because on comparison with the former application most if not all of the pertinent points apropos of finances are still carried into the new application form for social allowances.

But in addition to that -- in add ition to that , there are some new ones here that were not in the applic ation forms or a1·e not in the application forms in respect of old age assi stance. Now I know the Minister the other day on this question being raised by one of my col leagues gave us some answers. I said at that time that ! was not satisfied with them and I still am not, because there is an indication -- there is an in dication in this application for social allowance of an investigation into the imme diate relatives who are not living with the applicant.

Now if that is not to try and asc ertain on the basis of means rather than need because as ! understand it the whole basic philosophy as pronounced by the Minister that we're dealing Page 1130 March 1st, 1960

(Mr. Paulley, cont'd) .. .... with the question of social allowances and aid on the basis of the need of the individual concerned not on the ability of the -- as the application says, the imme di ate relatives not living with the applicant. Further to that, insofar as the application is con cerned and I think rather properly, that all of the financial circumst ances of the individual concerned who is making application are taken into acc ount, a!ld I don't think anybody will ,argue with that point but I do raise some objections to Item No. 11 or question No. 11 which deals with military servic e.

It calls for regimental numbers and enlistment dates and discharge dat es, and I think it's proper for the departm ent to asce rtain from the individual who is making a request for additional aid whether or no they are in receipt of a pension in respect of war service or disability. I think.that's proper. But that was handl ed in the, or is handl ed in the application in respect of old age ass istance simply by asking the individual concerned as to whether or not they are in receipt of a disability or service pension, which I think, Mr.

Chair man, quite frankly is a far better approach than this one in the new application form, because there are many people -- there are many people who may be in need who did not have the opportunity for various reasons of serving King or Queen in armed services, that may feel embarrassed with this question. Again I say , I apprecia te very very much the reasons behind it but I think rather than the bald request of an answer of this type, it should have been the same general question on t�e application for old age assi stance.

Likewise I've raised objections and I can understand that there may be some reason - basi c reason although I didn't quite agree with the Minister's answer the other day in question No. 13 asking for religion or church affiliation if any. Now I can understand this , Mr. Chair man, that the department will be trying in respect of the person who may be going into a home for the aged or an institution, that where sorne religious group are looking after them, it may be desira ble for the individual who may be of one particular affiliation to go into that particular group or institution, and I can appreciate that.

But I think rather than that being a specific question on an application it should be asc ertained by a different method, and would suggest again to save possible embarrassment to any person who may not have any particular church affiliation that it should be considered to be deleted from the application form. And then there's one question here, No. 15 , that really intrigues me - "W hat needs do you have which your present income does not meet? " I can conceive with a myriad of answers in respect of that. Now the Minister tells us that he is going to deal with this on a question of need.

Supposing the applicant put down there that one of the needs was a television set which is enjoyed by many people -- the maj ority of the people. Is that considered a need? I admit that that is rather a ridiculous statement to make, but in the application form that is the question and I think that it could be handled in a different manner. Now then, because after all the field worker's report then gives the description of need and, of course, the application is forwarded from there on.

So I say that while the Minister told us that this is the finest piece of legisla tion and the finest regulations that we have in the Dominion of Canada, but in many respects there's not too much difference than former ass istance that was given but it's called som ething different. Now then I'd just like to just for a moment, Mr. Speaker, take a look at the regulations under the Social Allowances Act.

If memory serves me correctly, that under the old age assist ance between 65 and 70 in respect of a single individual it is permissible for them to have as I understand the regulations, liquid assets or cash up to but not including $1, 000 per person if it is a single person.

In other words as I understand it, that if a single person is making application for old age assistance or a person at the present time o·1er the age of 70 who by reason of not having any additional income other than social security, who is making a request for payment of hospi talization premiums, that they are allowed asset s of up to $1, 000. Now then when we read the regulations, it appears to me that the only liquid assets they can have is $200 per recipient with a ma.'\:imum on a family basis of $1, 000.

In this it appears to me that before any person between the ages of 65 and 70 for instanc e, will be able to receive any addition al ass istance they must use up the liquid assets they have if, say for instance, they have $900 before they could qualify they would have to make that expenditure to get down to the $200 which appears to me, if I am correct and I can't see how it is otherwise as stated in the regulations, is a backward step rather than a forward step. There's also one other point, Mr. Chairman, in respect of the regulations that I wonder March 1st, 1960 Page 1131

(Mr. Paulley, cont'd) ..... why has not come into effect. The Minister has told us that certain sections have come into effect, certain others have not as yet. But I think one of the vital parts of the regulation has not been proclaimed as yet and that is parag raph G of sub-section 2 of

section 1, and that is the paragraph which deals with the health care of those who are over the age of 65 and in need of allowances -- cash allowances. I would like to ask the Minister how are these people going to receive the necessary medical and surgical care that they require - optical supplies, essential dental care, essential drugs, other remedial care and treatment. Those items are listed in

section G. Are they still going to have, nohvithstanding the fact that we ma de such an advanced step in the Province of Manitoba at the present level -- are they still going to have to go to municipal councils and request this aid? Because that

section as I understand the reading of the last paragraph , it's not being proclaimed. How are they going to obtain it? I think the question is a very pertinent one and I would like to hear the comment from the Honourable the Minister apropos of that. (Interjection) Pardon? It's subsection (

g) of -- 12 (

g) of

section 2 dealing with health care. As I understand it, it's not being proclaimed and I think that is one of the things that we in this group have asked for that any person in the Province of Manitoba who requires socia l allowances should by right or should automatic ally be given a certificate of some nature which will entitle them on the presentation of that certific ate to receive what care they want or need at the time without any further appeals to either municipal governments or to the provincial government. So I say those are a few remarks that I would make at this time.

There's one other one, and I'm sorry he is not in his seat at the present time, that I was quite intrigued with, and that was in the

section of health care that I was dealing with

Section 6, which states that the individual might receive or could receive such chiropractic treatment as a director may authorize after consultation with a duly qualified medical prac titioner who has examined the patient . Now it seems to me that there is a general aversion of the medical profession to chiropractors and I'm wondering how many cases the chiropractors will get some business in connection with this . I don't know who's recommended that, but that is one of the parts of the thing. So for the present, Mr. Chairman, those are a few questions that I have in i:ny mind.

I offer them to the Minister not in any belittling way, or not to try and knock down his program at all but I think they are pertinent and Ih ope that the Minister doesn't think they are impertin ent because they are certainly not mea nt in tha t manner at all. I say to him that there does appear to be a general advancement in this . There is lots of room and I'm sure that he'll agree with me, for improvements. I would like one further question, it's dealing with the financial ma tte

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	26-2-31a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	26th 2nd hansardpdf 31a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	ef382848f904637af9be5fe20c0e51381f3a6d41

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