Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 39 (29th Legislature, 4th Session)

29-4-39

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 8:00 o'clock, Thursday, April 13, 1972 969 MB. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose has approximately five minutes left. MR . ADAM: Five minutes, Mr. Speaker? MR . SPEAKER: Approximately. The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose . BUDGET DEBATE MR . ADAM: Mr. Speaker, at 5:30 I believe I was talking about our fishing industry in Manitoba.

I had quite a few other topics that I wanted to speak on but I presume that I'll have to hold them over for the estimates. -- (Interjection) -- I can't emphasize too strongly on members on this side of the House as well as the Opposition how important the fishing industry is to Manitoba. And I would sincerely ask for their support if we are able to spend more money to rehabilitate our lakes. I wanted to make a few comments on the remarks made by the Member for Pembina. I see he's in his chair now and he has his hearing aid on so I presume he'll be able to catch every word that I have to say.

Perhaps he has a transistor with him, I don't know. He made a few remarks in opposition to an increase in the minimum wage for labour in the Province of Manitoba. He says it was hard on the farmers and I agree with him, it is. -- (Interjection) -- And I want to say that rm also a farmer. I have been paying $2.00 an hour for my men for the last two years. -- (Interjection) -- I'm not making any money, rm not trying to say that I'm making any money but a well paid worker is a happy worker and a satisfied worker. If you want to be cheap you're going to have cheap labour.

And I say to the honourable member before he starts pulling somebody else, tearing somebody else's houses down he better start by building his own. -- (Interjection) -- Build your own house, Sir, build your unions. You are trying to pass the buck because of your failure. You are trying to get labour to subsidize you. -- (Interjection) -- Organize yourself. How much work have you done to help the national farmers' union? -- (Interjection) -- Ask yourself this question. -- (Interjection) -- I suspect, Mr.

Speaker, that if those farm members across the floor, if they belong to a union they belong to the Federation of Agriculture or the Farm Bureau which is infiltrated by big business. A MEMBER: Ha ha!. MR . ADAM: Those are the fellows that they support and they cry the blues. -- (Interjec tion) -- I say take another look at your position and as farmers -- (Interjections) -- there's quite a few farmers in the opposition-- it's beyond me to see why you are in the Conservative Party. -- (Interjections) -- I say it's time to be positive and not negative.

Don't tear labour down, build your own house, build your own house. -- (Interjections) -- Learn from them, Sir, learn. Learn how to bargain. They could teach you. I could go on--(Interjections) - for half an hour yet, Mr. Speaker, but I know that I will not have that opportunity. I wanted to say a few remarks about the Wizard of Oz, no Iz, Iz, sorry-- but I don't think I will say too much in that direction. The House Leader of the Liberal group is not present. -- (Interjections) -- It was obvious to me that the text that he read from was not his own. He appeared to me to be quite uncomfortable.

He was ill at ease; he was anxious to get it over with and I suspect that he didn't believe what he was reading. -- (Interjection) - And I would congratulate him for that if that is the case. It appeared in the press that the Leader of the Liberal group is asking for an investigation into the spending, government spend ing, and if he can prove his allegations he's ready to resign and I want to knowwhat he is resigning from -- (Interjections) -- Who does he think he's kidding? I suspect that after the Wolseley by-e lection he's going to have to resign anyway. Thank you very much.

MR o SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR . McKENZIE: I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your kind words of recognition and I face a most difficult task tonight, Mr. Speaker, following that great member for Ste. Rose and that new philosophy and that new wisdom that -- (Interjections) -- I'm also combatting a very important hockey game tonight, the last Canadian team that is competing in the Stanley Cup play-ofls is battling for their lives tonight and I hope that they win. That's another problem I have anq of course, Mr. Speaker, the third priority is the budget. Mr.

Speaker, I think in all fairness to you, Mr. Speaker, that we must be fair to this Legislature and this member that just spoke, I know he hasn't done his homework. He really

970 April 13, 1972 (MR. McKENZIE cont'd) ..•.. hasn't done his homework. He stood up here .. . and he said it's beyond him why there are Conservatives in this Legislature. --(Interjection) -- I know he has many limitations. --(Interjection) --I know he has many limitations, Mr. Speaker, and I'll elaborate on other ones. I recall when he was on the Agricultural Committee he didn't even know the difference between herbicide and insecticide so I understand quite well why he doesn't understand there are Conservatives, you know, because, Mr. Speaker, he hasn't done his homework. And .. . --(Interjections) -- MF.

SPEAKER: Order, please. MR . McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, for the Honourable Member for Ste. Rose to stand up here and berate the people --the members of this Legislature --and unfortunately he wasn't here when the member that preceeded him was in that chair representing that constituency. That man was a man and with great wisdom and great ability to debate. Never got into the gutter that you got in today in that kind of debate. So I tell you my friend, go back and do your homework and let's upgrade the quality of debate In this Chamber. --(Interjections) -- The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose, Mr.

Speaker, went on in his great wisdom and he said some members on this side of the House do not understand agriculture. Would he care to name them or tell me who they are? Where did you get all that great wisdom, you didn't pick that up in two years --(Interjections) -- surely in this House or did somebody that was here before you give you some of those lessons in economics that you gave us about speech marketing. MR . SPEAKER? Order, please. I should like to ask the honourable gentleman to face 1 the microphone, I have difficulty hearing him when he faces away. MR . McKENZIE: I apologize, Mr. Speaker.

Could I have one of those travelling micro phones? But, Mr. Speaker, I'm most encouraged by this great fisherman from the Inter lake area there and all his wisdom about fishing and all the things that he's done for fishing for the last 20 years, and this really turned me on. In fact I couldn't eat my supper I was so choked up about the great words of wisdom. But he reminds me of a story, Mr. Speaker, of a butcher --and I happen to be a merchant and a lady comes into the butcher shop and talks about pork chops and they're 95 cents a pound.

And of course she berates the butcher and she says, "Well look.�91> cents a pound- the guy across the street's got them for 70." i•well," he says, "Why don't you go over and buy them for 70 cents a pound." "Well," she says, "He hasn't got them." "Well," he says, "If I didn't have them you could have them for 50 cents a pound." And that was the wisdom that he gave us with his great new philosophy of prices of the Fish Marketing Board. --(Interjection) -- Mr. Speaker, I again would like to quarrel with the remarks of the great member from St.

Vital who in this House yesterday made some of the things - some remarks that I didn't like and I would like to challenge. And if I didn't hear the member correctly, I haven't read Hansard today --but in his great wisdom, and I don't quarrel with it, he said farmers are tax dodgers, if I understood him correctly? Tax dodgers--and that the farmers should join the labour union. Now isn't that--that's the message they've been trying to send across this country for 100 years. And it ain't going to work. And I'll give you the reasons it ain't going to work. I suggest to the Honourable Member from St.

Vital, sure the farmers have tax free gas in their farm trucks. They are allowed to take off their hydro and their telephone off their income tax and use depreciation schedules on their farm machinery. But I'll ask the Honourable Member for St. Vital in all good faith in replying to his remarks, I could support your views maybe if you would support us in our wisdom. Minimum wages, let's talk about minimum wages --and I'm talking from agriculture from a rural constituency.

Talking to us about what is your philosophy on the minimum wage as far as rural Manitoba is concerned or the removal of the compulsory union membership. Maybe I could talk to you if you'd meet me at that level and let me debate that with you.

Or the right to strike - who has the right to strike in this country today? --(Interjection) -- Is that fair, the strikes that are going across this country--(Interjection) --hockey today--NABET --striking over a silly little hockey game and using that tool --(Interjections) --oh no, they always pick the most opportune time when the farmers are trying to ship their grain to Vancouver, who the hell goes on strike! The--(Interjections) --Yeah they go on strike because--(Interjection) --it's a very important thing.

And now you know, the tariffs --I know the NDP policy on tariffs but I would- would you ask me to support --let's remove some of those tariffs, they're a federal jurisdiction but let's remove them --and I'd like you to support me on that view. And now let's move on. The discriminating freight rates that we experience in western Canada --and if you the NDP will support me on cleaning up some of those di�criminating freight rates, sure I'll talk to you

April 13, 1972 (MR o McKEN ZIE cont'

d) o o 0 0 0 about your poinL And let's talk about the ridiculous -- (Interjection) -- large number of grants that are going to industries across this country, millions of dollars are being ploughed into industry 971 by the Federal Government. What for?

But you want to talk about the farmer getting his . telephone rates and his hydro rates off his income tax or using purple gaso Let's clean up that problem firsto Then I say, Mro Speaker, in my great wisdom the farmers of this province and western Canada could compete and meet the world markets and they don't need the concessions that they are granted todayo And I think that is a fair statement, Mro Speaker, and if the members of the NDP would get down to earth and recognize that there are farmers -- we're not union people, we're with you all the wayo I don't quarrel with unions -I'm with you all the way but you've got to meet us guys half way so me place along the line because my livelihood's on the line the same as yours is and if you sit over there and I sit over here and we never meet, we just stand up and bitch and quarrel, we're not going to solve nothing, we're just going to shoot this society right down the draino Well, Mro Speaker, I have another problem that I wanted to bring to your attention tonight and to the House and I shall speak on generalities on it -- and I may on Tuesday be speaking on a grievance on this matter -- but it's a very serious matter in my constituency dealing with bureaucrats, and big government, maybe not this big government or these big 0 0 0 But it deals with -- some people from my constituency happen to be of Indian ancestry and we have a problem with Indian Affairso And, Mr.

Speaker, here's a local farmer, full-blooded Indian, credit all established in the bank - the local bank - no problem, goes there and makes an application for a small loan approved, the loan's approvedo He finds out through all this great great Indian Affairs Department and the problems of the bureaucrats; he gets into Winnipeg and the local banker sent him in here with the money to check it out and make sure-- it's all shot downo He can't get his loan, he can't get an $8, 000, $9, 000 loan because the Indian Affairs and all the bureaucrats said: "Look, all you Indians got to be on welfare for the rest of your dayso" And that's the way the policy is and that's the policy of that Indian Affairs Department and those bureaucrats, and I challenge you maybe on Tuesday if we don't clear the matter up, Mro Speaker, I will be back here with a grievance on this matter which is a very serious matter to myself and to some of my constituentso Now, Mr.

Speaker, may I get back to the budget and preface my remarks with a statement that was made by a great socialist several years ago.

Sir Stafford Cripps was a great socialist - a great socialist in those days when the socialists were doing their thing in England - financial pundit, fine man, great politician but he said in one of his speeches, he said: ''Profits are necessary in a capitalist economy but they have to be suitably taxedo " And the word that I like to draw the emphasis on in this debate tonight, Mro Speaker, and in speaking to the Honourable Finance Minister and the government is the word "suitably"o And that statement, Mro Speaker, has the ring of Cripps' sincerity and I've read many of Cripps' speech, and few people who believe in big government will quarrel with that statement because big government cannot exist without excessive taxation and this is an example that we're facing in this province today.

But, Mro Speaker, if one looks closely at the statement of that great statesman, Sir Stafford Cripps, you'll note that adverb, that adverb "suitably" is in that statement, and that I think is one that this government unfortunately hasn't had the time to discuss or look at seriouslyo What might be suitable taxation to Sir Stafford might be far from suitable to me or to you or to the business community or to the man who in digust and despair and harassment of high taxes, he might want to and often does, Mr.

Speaker, throw in the towel and say to hell with it alL And that's the plight of the businessman in this community and this province today and I happen to be one of those businessmen in that particular sector. And I'm really alarmed, and I really quarrel with this government and their philosophy and their wisdom.

I don't think they have one businessman in that whole caucus over there except the Honourable Member for Thompsono I don't think there's any-- (Interjection) --I'll let the Honourable Member for Crescentwood have his day -- but I look across that bench and I've looked across every day since you came hereo The Honourable Member for Sto Boniface, let that be, he came along later -- but in all their great wisdom and all their great knowledge and all the people they've attracted to this philosophy of socialism, they haven't got one businessman over there except the Honourable Member for Thompsono And I congratulate him, I've been in his storeo I've bought trinkets in his storeo He knows how to make a buck the hard way.

He knows how to make a buck the hard wayo But from there, Mro Speaker, that's the end-of the business world

972 April 13, 1972 (MR. McKENZIE cont'd) .•..• as far as that caucus is concerned. --(Interjection) -- In fact, Mr. Speaker, I'll go farther, I'll go farther and I will say that the business failures in this province today and the number of businessmen who are moving out or planning to move out because they feel it might be mentally or physically easier and more profitable to get the heck out of this place, are a large number. There's a large number of people, and Mr.

Speaker, before we get through this debate on estate tax and gift taxation I think I'll be able to bring you a list here that will be hundreds of names involved in that--people that are moving out under this bill because --(Interjection) -- That's right --because what is the future of a businessman when this province with that kind of a government. There is --the Honourable Member from Thompson knows darn well, there is no future, there is no future at all, because they are going to get you sooner or later.

They're going to take it over, and they'll look after everybody from the cradle to the grave --and who goes, the businessman has got to go. The businessman has got to go --no way can he survive with this type of philosophy and wisdom. And the words of the Honourable Member from Ste. Rose this afternoon, Mr. Speaker --you know if some of his constituents could have heard, you know the businessmen --I saw him with one of his great business clients from Ste. Rose this morning at breakfast.

If he would have told that man what he said in the House here today, my oh my you talk about a quarrel, 'cause there's no way that you can be compatible with that kind of a person. Energetic businessmen building up that community, building up that constituency and so sure--you're not telling him the truth. And I say, Mr. Speaker, turn over so much of their profit and their philosophies and that. There's no way that the businessman in this province today can see his way clear to comply for plant depreciation. How can you provide for plant depreciation the way the Honourable Member for St.

Vital--he doesn't even want the farmer to get depreciation for hydro, you know, they don't believe in that depreciation factor. And then, of course, that can involve the plant depreciation factor, Mr. Speaker, that can involve the hiring of additional men. This govern ment doesn't understand that there is such a thing as hiring additional men or building your industries or moving on. No, the only way that you can build industry in this province, Mr. Speaker, they've got to do it under the wisdom of this Minister of Industry and Commerce.

He thinks that he is the only builder in the province . . . and I challenge him and I quarrel with him and I regret the day that they put that man in that Department of Industry and Commerce because that man is going to sell this province down the road--he never was a businessman. What does he know about the business world? --(Interjection) -- No way, no way. --(Inter jection) -- And, Mr.

Speaker, this --(Interjection) --this systematic draining away of the profits of the taxation plans of the people of this province by this government is going to kill this province, and it's going to be killed within five years. --(Interjection) -- in the govern ment, I--(Interjection) --Yeah ... MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. MR. McKENZIE: The Government of Canada is in the same rat race as this government. The Government of Canada believes in great governments; governments can spend the dollars better than the people and I quarrel with that, Mr.

Speaker, and I'll quarrel with it till the day I die because it's wrong. That wasn't the way that this province was built; that wasn't the kind of citizens you got out in my constituency; these are the people that came here with a buck in their pocket; they wore flour sacks and they fought and they worked by themselves; they didn't need no government handout and what did they do? In one hundred years we've built up a society that's second to none in this whole world--(Interjections) -- and these guys here come and they shoot it down.

Sir, the Minister of Municipal Affairs will stand up in this House and talk about public housing, Mr. Speaker. The day is coming and we're going to wade into that one with you right up to there, cause I've got housing reports and I've got housing studies in my pocket that's been done of your housing program and I'll tell you it's a farce, it's a farce, and it ain't going to work; it isn't going to work and you are going to take this province with that housing program unless you scrap. it.

And I tell you scrap it and get rid of it because you're going to give the taxpayers of this prov.ince a burden of billions and billions of dollars which they will never pay off. And the housing program can't work because you can't build housing; you're building cheap housing, you can't even meet the standards of the free enterprise builders. Well, Mr. Speaker, I point out to the Minister of Finance, in his budget, in his budget address, I'm sure he'll jump to his feet and talk about another tax shift, but that is not the fundamentals of the way of life in this province, Mr. Speaker, and I quarrel with it.

April 13, 1972 973 (MR. McKENZIE cont'd) ..... -- (Interjections) -- And the Minister of Health and Welfare, of course, -- he's not in his chair tonight, I wish to heck he was, with his fantastic huge spending estimates that we are getting out of that department-- NDP welfare, it's on the tips of everybody's tongue in this province today. I maybe have 200 letters in my briefcase that came in-- (Interjection) -- since the House opened-- everyone talking about welfare, and the way you guys are running it. I'll tell you, get back down to earth, - a buck's a buck. Always will be. Always will be. But, Mr.

Speaker, you know ... A MEMBER: You said that last year. MR. McKENZIE: This is the same kind of crank remarks you get across from those guys - they don't understand, you know. I see the Minister of Public Works tonight driving a great big Chrysler, wow, the biggest car I ever saw in the parking lot since I've beenanMLA!

I've seen Chevs, I've seen Pontiacs, and I've seen -- but I never saw a Minister except the First Minister -- and the First Minister has the right to drive a big car-- but the Minister of Public Works zoomed out of that back, behind the back door here tonight with a great big spanking new Chrysler. A MEMBER: Socialist! . . . MR. McKENZIE: I don't know what this means but I'm sure the taxpayers in this province must have paid for that car, I don't think he paid for it. Maybe in his wisdom tomorrow he'll stand up in the House and say, "Well, look I put in $5, 000. A MEMBER: .. . own a Chevy ... MR.

McKENZIE: I put in 5, 000 -- and maybe he did and if he did I don't quarrel with this but I don't think the Minister of Public Works deserves that kind of a car when the going's that tough out at rural Manitoba today-- (Interjection) -- No, drive a Datsun or drive an old Pontiac like I'm driving. But, Mr. Speaker-- (Interjections) -- this NDP government doesn't understand those, the only man that I see over there that understands is the Member for Thompson who's a businessman . . . A MEMBER: That's right. MR.

McKEN ZIE: Knows how to make a buck and knows that a buck's a buck, and yet these things have to happen as you develop a business concept-- and of course my job and the Minister of Thompson's job as a merchant, as a businessman- sure we can lose our jobs, we can lose our jobs for various reasons, but when you tax us out of existence you tax the Honour able Member for Thompson out of existence, and tax me out of existence. His employees got to go and I got to go and I again, Mr. Speaker, draw back to your attention and to the Minister of Finance, are those suitable taxes?

Are those suitable taxes for this day in this great province? And, Mr. Speaker, I'm not standing here tonight arguing that a measure of taxation is unjustifiable.

I think I'll stand here and argue against more of the vicious policies, the vicious taxation policies of this government; the estate taxation, the gift tax- those are the ones that really hurt because if that is the socialist philosophy that this province is going to have to ex perience for the next decade or the two hundred qecades, I tell the Minister of Finance to stand up and tell us where this province is going with that type of financing and that type of a budget because it isn't going to work. No way is it going to work, Mr.

Speaker, because you're going to confiscate and you're going to get rid of every businessnan in this province as long as you continue on that frame of mind. In all sincerity, I appeal to you Mr. Minister of Finance, change your trend of thought - get some of those red- eyed socialists off your back over there. You're a businessman, you know what it's all about or else go and talk to the Honourable Mem ber from Thompson and put him in the Finance chair. He knows what it's all about. He knows when a buck's a buck because he's the only guy over there that's a merchant and knows what it's all about. So, Mr.

Speaker, in all sincerity, again I appeal to you there's only one way in which the citizens of this province and Canada in fact can provide for their financial security to maintain and improve their present standard of living and that of tomorrow and that's by plowing today's profits. They don't know what that word means, Mr. Speaker. I've listened to the wisdom of this great Minister of Industry and Commerce and we've asked him questions day after day, what is the profits from all these giant corporations you're building? No, they'll never table them, they never will, because they don't know what profits means.

He doesn't -- he's a pro fessor from Brandon University. What does he know about profit? --(Interjection)-- He's a dreamer, a dreamer from the new socialist world. He doesn't even know what the word profit

974 April 13, 1972 (MR.McKENZIE cont'

d) means --I wish he was in his chair tonight because I will give him a few lessons in profit, because unless you can plow those profit dollars back into the building and the economy of this province, then I say, Mr. Speaker, those are not suitable taxes. You remember what Sir Stafford Cripps said: "suitable taxation". Those are not suit able taxes and they will not fit into the economy of this great Province of Manitoba. Mr.

Speaker, I shall now try and get across to my great Minister of Agriculture - Interjection -- about our number one industry in this province --Interjection -- And the problems are manifold as everybody knows, Mr. Speaker. And I'm reminded of a letter I received from a fellow constituent last fall wherein he replied and I'll quote -- a man that's spent 60 years of his life in my constituency, a great seed grower, a great cattle breeder, farms two sections of land, he really knew how to progress and move the agricultural economy of that area out -- and I'll quote as best I can, Mr.

Speaker, and here is his remarks. He says: "Dear Wally: Thanks for your kind letter. I don't know if my agricultural career should be the subject of congratulations. Everything I have done or tried to do over the years has been negated as a matter of government policy. The farmers are restricted to producing at least half their capacity, two-thirds of their market liquidated and sent to the urban ghettos, the railway tracks are being torn up and the elevators are being torn down thanks to Charlie Hunt. If I had my life to live over again I would be a hippie and I would go into the drug business.

If I worked real hard", he says, "at this I might be invited to some special cen tennial guest function of the province. Thanks anyway, Wally, for your letter. I makes me feel a little less relevant. Hope to see you at the Grandview Fair." Now those are the wisdom and the words of a great Manitoban. A man that's lived in this province for 60 years and gave of his all to put Manitoba where it is today--Interjection- It's my own words, Mr. Speaker, if you want. •• certainly. --(Interjection)-- Mr. Speaker, in all -- they can laugh, and this is interesting. Nobody ever over there --(lnterjection)- Mr.

Speaker, in all -- I will table -- (Interjection)-- No, I will. MR . SPEAKER: Order, please. Order. The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR . McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, that's always the reaction you get because nobody over there believes -- I will table the letter. I will. It's in my briefcase and I will table -- Mr. Speaker, do you mean to tell me that I would stand up in this House and quote a letter that isn't factual, but they don't believe it ••• A ME:MBER: They believe nothing. MR . McKENZIE: They don't even trust themselves. They don't even trust themselves, Mr. Speaker.

And let's look at this great report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture. I've read it. What a dream for the future of the --(Interjection)-- Yes, I'll table this one. Here you are, Sam, your report. MR . SPEAKER: Order, please. I'm sure the honourable member knows about the rule referring to honourable members by the constituencies. I wish he would remember that. The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR . McKENZIE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'll just quote the report, Page 3.

The Minister says here: "That the Minister of Agriculture may evaluate the many suggestions intended to deal with the problems of depopulation of rural areas, designed to bring stability for farm ing communities such as strengthening the position of our farmers in marketing and pricing as well as matters pertaining to land use. Your committee recommends that the Minister consider measures provided • • • " MR . SPEAKER: Order, please. I'm sure the honourable member is aware of our pro cedure where something has been dealt with should not be used as repetition.

The report has been tabled and it has been presented and I don't think we need to have it read again. The Honourable Member for Roblin. The Honourable Leader .of the Opposition. MR . SPIV AK: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. We are on the Budget Debate which is a free-wheeling debate and I think the past practice has been and the tradition has been that the honourable member can take this occasion to speak on whatever he so desires and can make his presentation in the way.in which he desires. MR .

SPEAKER: I don't intend to get into a procedural hassle over this, but I do think that our regular rules of procedural debate do apply and repetition is one of the things we do not practice whether it's the Throne Speech debate or the Budget debate. The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR . McKENZIE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I will retract those earlier remarks but can I

April 13, 1972 975 (MR . McKENZIE (cont'd) • . • • use five words out of this report: ''Related industrial ac tivity in rural areas," and that's all I want to quote from it, Mr. Speaker. "Related in dustrial activity in rural areas," and I'd like to dwell on that theme at great length tonight, Mr. Speaker, with your permission. And I regret very much, Mr. Speaker, that this government and this First Minister and this Minister of Agriculture cannot or will not assist the community of Grandview in their efforts to build and develop an industry right in that community. --(Interjection) --Certainly.

These great Manitobans, those citizens of Grand view have put up 20, ooo· bucks of their own money. They've provided themselves with their own feasibility studies; they've provided themselves with the equipment; they went over to Europe and they found that they could trade oil for machinery, Mr. Speaker, and this govern ment will not stand up and support those people for industrial development.

And I challenge the First Minister, and I challenge this Minister of Ag riculture to stand up and defy us and say that they didn't do it. --(Interjection) -- Now just sit down, I'll talk-- after you're finished-- you can talk to me tomorrow, Sam, because I've got a lot to say on this issue. --(Interjection) -- No, I've got a lot to say on this issue, Mr. Speaker, and I don't think this Minister of Agriculture is fair. He doesn't even know what's going on in rural Manitoba. And what happens, Mr. Speaker ? This great ND P government and this great Minister of Industry and Commerce from Brandon, what are they doing?

They're playing hanky-panky with Kraft Foods to put a same bloody industry in Brandon - in Brand on of all places l Who grows rape seed in Brand on? Nobody.

We grow all the rapeseed between the Duck Mountains and the Riding Mountains of this province and we've grown it for years and we '11 continue to grow it yet this Minister of Industry and Commerce, this First Minister and this Minister of Agriculture are playing hanky-panky with Kraft Foods and what does the farmers' union of this province say about Kraft Foods -t hey're a bunch of gangsters and yet these guys are playing hanky-panky with them and they're trying to build a same plant in Brandon. A MEMBER: No. MR. McKENZIE: Certainly, Mr.

Speaker, and if that's the kind of Minister of Agri culture that we've got in this province and that's the guy that we're going to get for rural industrial development, Mr. Speaker, I ask him to stand up and resign because he's a failure an absolute failure. He's failed the people of Grandview constituency, Mr. Speaker, for two years and he's failing the farmers of this province today and I stand up and I challenge him on this issue to lay your cards on the table and let's get serious - argue, get with those people in Grandview and build that plant or I say, you resign.

Again, I'm not going to quarrel, I just give you one chance, l\Ir. Evans. That's a serious matter and that's one where the local people put up 20, 000 bucks of their own money ••• A MEMBER: Take it or leave it. l'viR. McKENZIE: And they've got a Minister of Agriculture that hasn't got the guts to stand up and join them and say: "Look, we'll help you build it." He goes and he plays hanky panky with the Minister of Industry and Commerce and the First Minister and they go and try to build one in Brandon and if that's progress, Mr.

Speaker, I challenge this government-- I tell the Minister of Finance, you better go and frame your budget again because you didn't know you had these kind of Ministers around you. They're not going to build rural Manitoba - no way - because they don't know how, they don't know how with that kind of a Minister of Agriculture. He doesn't even know we exist out there and I challenge the Minister of Agri culture, get with it and get with those people at Grandview and help them build that industry or I say resign -- (Interjection) - - or give me just reason why you shouldn't. Mr. Speaker ,I'll move on.

I've got a lot of things but I want to leave that one point with this government tonight - - and I've got a lot of other things I want to, but I don't want to clutter up the water, I don't want to clutter up the clouds. I'll leave you with that one challenge in this budget debate. The balls in your court, and I say get out and get with it, reach quick. Dump that Brandon project, get rid of Kraft Foods. You don't need Kraft Foods.

The people of Grandview can do it by themselves. - - (Interjection) -- The Minister of Industry and Commerce, he's reading some comic book over there or something -- but I tell you the Minister of Industry and Commerce I've had enough of this. I was in here two years ago, I was in here a year ago and you deferred our meetings that morning, your meeting with Kraft Foods th:at morning. Why didn't you tell us - what are you hiding? Oh I say, stand up and fight your battles and I'll fight mine on behalf of my constitiuency

976 April 13th, 1972 (MR. McKENZIE cont 'd) • • • but I tell you and I warn you, the Minister of Industry and Commerce, do not build that rapeseed industry in Brandon, because if you do, you'll never be elected back to this Legislature again, because we'll be marching on Brandon by the hundreds. We will, because we're that mad the way you've handled this affair and it's time it was cleared up.

I challenge the First Minister, get with these guys and clean that thing up and let's get with that plant and progress in Grandview which they've been asking for for three years. --(Interjection) -- No, after I'm finished, I only have forty minutes Mr •• •• (Interjection) - - But Mr.

Speaker, they've got hung up in this supply management . . . this is where they got buggered up. -- (Interjection) -- No, they're - -instead of building that rape seed plant at Grandview, the Minister of Agriculture got himself hung on this supply management thing and I knew where he picked that dream up because there's been a heck of a lot of dreamers before he came on the scene in private. They've all been -the Grits, the Federal Grits they've tried it, the Americans have tried it, they've tried it in Europe. It won't work. It's that simple Mr.

Speaker, because the solution to farm problems is not to cut back production and split up the markets that's not the solution or the future of this province. It's only a hundred years old and do you mean to tell me Mr. Minister of Agriculture, that you're going to split up those markets -you're going to cut prices, is that the future of rural Manitoba under this kind of a government? So Mr. Speaker, I appeal again to this Minister of Agriculture and to this government and to the Minister of Finance who brought this budget in - - we need positive, positive agricultural policies.

Let's maintain the family farm and don't destroy it by estate taxes and gift taxes and property taxes and production machinery taxes and ta da, ta da, ta da and it goes on and on and on. Mr. Speaker I suggest to the Minister of Agriculture we need a policy which will support rural development, develop that Grandview rapeseed industry, that's progress and I'll help you in every way possible, Mr. Minister. -- (Interjection) -- Well, let's get with that one. Let's not build it at random. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable Member has five minutes. MR. McKENZIE: Mr.

Speaker, I could go on all night - - (Interjection) - -with that kind of a government -with that kind of a government, Mr. Speaker, I could heap so many problems on your shoulder tonight you couldn't walk out of this room. People in the Province of rural Manitoba - - let's talk - - (Interjection) --with the Minister, and unfortunately there is no Acting Minister of Mines and Natural Resources -now who the heck am I going to talk to Mr. Speaker.

I appealed to the First Minister three times to get a Minister, so I'll do my best and try and get my words of wisdom across to the Acting Minister and again I appeal for a full time minister to deal with the delegations and the problems that I experience in my con stituency. I am one of the maybe the few MLA's that have the problems of the Duck Mountains and the Riding Mountains and those are maybe more serious than others but the one --the one, you know, most serious at this time is the problem of the wildlife.

The wildlife this past winter have created a serious problem to those that live along the periphery of the Duck Mountains and the Riding Mountains. For some unknown reason there are still some crops that are unharvested -but the wildlife have done thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars of damage to farmers' haystacks, farmers' crops -- and I know the policy - we have been in the Minister's office but I think at the time, Mr. Speaker, that we've got to find some way. Those farmers don't have to feed all those wild animals.

My gosh, the animals belong to the province and let's be fair, they're yours and just because I happened to have a haystack across the road and 14 Elk jump over my 12 foot fence at night, in the morning, I've got nothing -I've no haystack or nothing. They're your animals and I suggest to you Mr. Speaker, compensate those farmers for their losses -that's very, very important. Little farmers - small quarter sect ion farmers who can't afford those kind of losses. I will give you 8, 9, 10 letters that since the session has opened that I've got and this is a serious matter and really I appeal to the government again.

I know we've moved forward quite a bit over the last -since I first became an MLA - - first of all we are collecting monies today and we're providing lure crops for birds and we have progressed and that is - we've moved but somehow we must meet that problem of those small farmers who are experi encing this. A guy, 80 acres Pine River, was it yesterday wrote me - -owned 80 acres of crops out there, there's nothing left -you know that's worth $4,000. That's his livelihood, so what's his choice Mr. Speaker - - go on welfare - -I know the government are not paying

April 13, 1972 977 (lVIR, l\IcKENZIE cont'

d) compensation but I say let's take another - there's not that many I don't think and the bill would not be that too big but I appeal to the Minister of Finance in his great wisdom - - in his budget cue in about two words in your reply about some way Mr. Minister, that we can compensate those few farmers and there are not that many but: I assure you, you will do a lot of people a lot of good to a few small people. Well, Mr. Speaker, let's move back into the Welfare Department • Have I got enough time, Mr. Speaker, to • • • MR . SPEAKER: No, two minutes. MR . McKENZIE: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I'll debate that issue at a later date. I thank you for your attention and I thank the members for the wisdom that I brought to you from Roblin constituency. MR . SPEAKER, I apologize that I can't support the motion but I ask the members of the House to support the amendment and sub-amendment at this time. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Agriculture. HON. SAMUEL USKIW (Minister of Agriculture) (Lac Du Bonnet): I would like to know how the honourable member would assume or would know of my apparent or alleged dis interest in Grandview and the proposed rapeseed cushion plant. MR .

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin. Ivffi. McKENZIE: Mr. Speaker, I only need to know that you're going to build a plant at Brandon. That indicates to me that you are not interested in my constituency, MR . USKIW: Would the honourable member have a preference as between a plant in Roblin and Grandview as there is apparent interest in both - does he have a preference as to where a plant should be located since there is only room for one in that area? MR . McKENZIE: Mr.

Speaker, that raises an interesting question but that would give me another forty-minut e speech. -- (Interjection) -- I am not aware, and if the Minister has some information that there is an application for Roblin I'm not aware, but I am the MLA there and if there is some faction in Roblin that's designing a plant, I'd like to know about it.

I am not aware of it but I certainly am aware of the one in Grandview which I've had for four years - you know they started four years ago, I am not aware of the one at Roblin and if the Minister has some information he would care to share with me, I'd gladly, you know - the only one I am aware of is the one in Grandview in my constituency. 1\'IR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable Member for St. Matthews. MR . WALLY JOHANNSON (St. Matthews): Would the honourable member submit to a question? MR . SPEAKER: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Morris on a point of order. MR . JORGENSON: Surely Mr.

Speaker, sometime ago you said that the Member for Roblin had five minutes left and that five minutes elapsed. If anybody wants to ask questions after the forty minutes have elapsed must require the permission of the House to do so. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member had two minutes left when he sat down. Are you ready for the question? The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. I wish the House would get with it. I 'm trying to conduct a business - - (Interjection) - - is the House ready to proceed or are we taking a vote? The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. 1\ffi, SHERMAN: Thank Mr. Speaker. I might say, Mr.

Speaker, that I was deferring to the l\Iember for Winnipeg Centre in the normal course of rotation of speakers. I understood that he wanted to go next. Mr. Speaker • • • MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister on a point of order. MR::'Cl:HEYER:Yes I realize that the honourable member from Fort Garry was expecting my colleague, the Honourable Member from Winnipeg Centre to speak. I think where the unfortunate confusion arose is that he had the impression that the matter would go to a vote but if that's not the intention, then we would not want the normal rotational procedure to be abandoned.

The Honourable Member is not here now, Mr. Speaker. I apologize. 1\ffi, SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR . SHERMAN: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to talk about Tourism and the general area of Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs in the time available at my disposal tonight, Mr. Speaker, because we are dealing with the budget, with the province's spending program for the forthcoming fiscal year and we are talking money and finances, financial and fiscal well being of the people of Manitoba and tourism should be one of the big mon�y earners for the

978 April 13, 1972 (MR. SHERMAN cont'd) ••• province of Manitob a. Indeed it was only last year, Sir, that the Economic Development Advisory Boa rd told the Standing Committee of this Legisla ture on Economic Development that tourism should be elevated to the status of No . 1 or one of the No . 1 industries in this provinc e and that no economic effort should be spared to that end . While one might not agree, Mr.

Speaker, that tourism should be elevated to the status of No . 1 indu stry, there are others like agriculture and mining, hydro electric energy, food proces sing, manufacturing, the insura nce industry, the garment trade and many more that are of fundamental importance to us and that justifiably vie for No . 1 ranking --but in this shrinking world, in this world of instant communic ation and global travel one can hardly find disfavour with the philosophy that was contained in that recommendation from the Economic Development Advisory Board, or with the emphasis on tourism as a potential, major money earner for this provinc e.

The plain fact is, Mr . Speaker, that the message from the Economic Development Advisory Board is essentially correct. Tourism is a key industry for Manitoba today as it is for nearly every corner of the settled world and it's a tough competitive game - a game in which you either go with your first stringers Sir, with your best men, your best ammunition, your professionals, or you finish second best which means losing out . And I'm disa ppointed, Mr .

Speaker, that the foresight and the perception and the presence of mind of the Economic Development Advisory Board in that report that I've referred to has apparently been wasted, that the challenge has apparently fallen on barren ground . Mr.

Speaker, for a provinc e that does not possess the most salubrious climate in the world; for a provinc e that does not have the rich and easily acces sible natural resources of many of its more richly endowed neighbour s; for a provinc e that has to run pretty hard just to keep up in the race for jobs and the good life for most or all of its people; and for a provinc e that has been given some imaginative forward looking advice by one of its responsible boards, the current performanc e by the government in the field of tourism is pretty lousy . It 's terrible in short, Mr . Speaker.

The fact of the matter is we are not going into the game with our first stringers, with our professi onals, we're in the toughest game in North America, the competi tive game for the tourist dollar, possibly one of the toughest games in the western world today. We're playing again st some of the slickest and smartest operators in the busine ss and we are doing it with amateu rs. --(Interjection) -- We 've got a good bullpen, the First Minister says . Well I hope he's right. Because we are going to need one . We 're doing it on the cheap and we 're doing it with amateu rs . And I wish to say, Mr .

Speaker, that my criticisms are not directed at the present Minister of Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs as such, because after all he's only been Mini ster for a few month s. They're offered to him as guidelines as to what I think he should be doing in the next few months and they're directed as criticisms of the whole government as such, and obviously by implication I would have to confess at the former Minister of Tourism. Mr . Speaker, the government 's record, its efforts and its investm ent in the field of tourism are not good enough .

In recent years the tourist industry has generated an annual contribution of about 135 millions of dollars to the economy of the Province of Manitob a. That's approximately one dollar in every thirty, Sir, and that may sound substantial when viewed at in the first form in which I made reference to it, 135 millions of dollars. It does not sound so substantial when viewed in the second frame of reference, one dollar out of every 30 . The fact is that it isn't enough, Mr .

Speaker; it isn't enough in comparison to what it could be, to what it should be or indeed to what it must be if we're going to avoid being left behind in the compe tition for tourists against other Canadian provinces and American states . It's not necessa rily a matter Sir, of not spending enough money, although I would like to take one moment to suggest that I think we're not spending enough money in Tourism, Recreation aU1 Cultural Affairs in total .

There's a one and a balf·million dollar increase in spending appropr iations for this department in the government 's new estimates and that's inconsequential, Mr . Speaker, by comparison with the rise in spending in many other departments and yet this department although obviously not recognized as such by members of the government, is of critical importanc e to the well being and the welfare and the future of Manitob a and to the good life in Manitoba. However, as I ,suggested, it 's not necessa rily a case of not spending enough money.

I would like to see the appr opriations in the spending program for Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs substantially increased, which would be an accommodation that could only be achieved by complementary decreases in other areas which I would suggest could be thoroughly justified . But apart from that argument, even taking the $9 million as a figure within which we

April 13, 1972 979 (MR . SHERMAN cont'd) ••• have to work, my criticism is substantially, Mr. Speaker, that we're not spending or planning to spend those monies, limited as they are, either intelligently enough or innovatively enough;. that we are not in short bringing any imagination Mr. Speaker, to the tourist industry field.

The Department of Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs gets $9 million out of a total provincial spending program amounting to 575 .8 millions so that 's approximately 1-1/2 percent, Sir; its a little better - fractionally better than 1-1/2 percent out of a spending budget of close to $600 million and that I suggest Sir, shows you and shows the House and shows Manitobans precisely where the government's imagination is, where Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs are concerned .

It tells us something and it tells us a very great deal in fact, about the esteem in which the go:vernment holds the tourist industry and the recreation and cultural field.

And that lack of imagination, that lack of sensitivity to the importance of tourism and recreation and cultural affairs; that lack of comprehension of the value of the tourist indus try in the peripheral fields, that lack of a concept of what the Economic Development Advisory Board was talking about when it made the recommendation with respect to the Tourist Industry, is reflected all down the line, Sir, in the manner in which the government administers the affairs of the people of Manitoba in this 'field, and in the manner in which that very limited budget is to be spent. Mr .

Speaker, a report that is very current, that was prepared by the Tourist and Con vention Ass ociation of Manitoba Incorporated in January of this year, 1972, make:! specific emphasis of three or four basic and fundamental concepts in the Tourist and Recreation field that are critical to the kind of program in this department that I reco=end should be under taken by this government, and is essential to present well-being and the future well-being of the Province of Manitoba and to the securing of its proper place in the competition for that tourist dollar that I' m talking about.

This particular report stresses for example, Tourism is the ultimate export industry because it does not deplete resources . What one tourist uses and pays for this week, the report suggests, is left intact for the most part for another tourist to use and pay for the next week. ''Indeed" , says the report, " it may even result in the develop ment of new resources that benefit the co=unity as a whole even though the original purpose was simply to attract tourists" .

So this is concept No . 1, that Tourism is the ultimate export industry that does not for the most part, if properly administered, deplete resources . Concept No . 2, stressed in this particular report, is the fact that it's obvious and self evident to most people in the settled industrial world today that competition for the tourist dollar is growing rapidly and the tourist in consequence is becoming more and more sophisticated .

The report says and I quote : "that the tourist is prepared to spend his money now only if he gets the kind of value for it that he has learned to desire, the value that he has learned to want" . This means that advertising alone is not enough and that a continuing effort must be made to improve that product . Concept No . 3, among the four that I wish to cite from this particular report, Mr.

Speaker, is that product improvement involves both the environment and the individual operator, and that development of new attractions , and I'm quoting again directly from the report, "Develop ment of new attractions, protection of the environment, cleanup campaigns , etc., must of necessi ty involve the co=unity as a whole" . And finally, the list of specific concepts cited herein to which I want to make reference at this time, is the thesis that promotion remains highly important, if not fundamentally important, since tourism in the words of the report is a market-oriented consumer industry.

And the report goes on that promotion itself must be destination-oriented, and must be a co-operative endeavour involving not only the private sector but all levels of government, and there must be the fullest kind of co-operation and co-ordination of effort to insure that the development of the promotion operation, the promotion undertaking, is achieved to its fullest . I must also in fairness, Mr. Speaker, add that this particular report contains a compli mentary reference to what the Manitoba Government is doing in the field of tourism.

I disagree with that reference but I'll read it into the record because I intend to continue with the register ing of my criticisms and I will place alongside those criticisms this particular recommendation. The report says that, and again I quote, "The Manitoba government augments this" and they are referring to the promotion operation to which I just referred, "augments this with an excellent campaign, promoting Manitoba as the friendly province and the one to visit in Ca nada . The individual operators must promote under these umbrellas to attract ·the tourist into his

980 April 13, 1972 (MR . SHERMAN cont'd) . • • particular place of business ." Well there is much more in that particular report, Mr . Speak er, but I wanted to make specific reference to those four concepts and as I say, I add the additional complimentary comment by the Tourist and Convention Asso ciation where the promotional efforts of the Manitoba Government are concerned .

But I disagree with that comment most emphatic ally beca use I feel, Sir, that the advertising efforts -- and I can see that there is a great deal more to promotion than adverti sing - - but the adverti sing efforts of the Department of Tourism as administered and created and handled by those agencies who handle the department's acc ount is inadequat e, and is inefficient, and is Unworthy of the kind of money that is being spent on it . Mr .

Speaker, what it adds up to is a list, a ca talogue of shortcomings in the adminis tration of the Touri sm, Rec reation and Cultural Affairs aspect of life in Manitoba that indicates that in terms of the attitude and philosophy of the government, tourism as such , in fact the whole broad field under the umbrella of that department, is rea1ly the remittance man, the remittance man of this government. The remittance man as you know, Sir, was the man who was the black sheep of a family .

It was an institution that perhaps took its greatest, fourid its greatest roots in this part of the world in the latter part of the 19th century and perhaps the early part of this century when many families, most notably English families I believe, would finance the exodus of one member of their family, who perhaps had not meas ured up in the manner in which they hoped, to a life in the new world and that member, generally it was a man, was effectively written off as far as the family was concerned for the rest of time , but he did rec eive from the family his regular cheque , his regular remittance, month by month, or year by year, which enabled him to support himself in Sa skatchewan or Manitoba or the United States, or wherever he happened to have gone but he never returned home again to the bosom of his family.

He was an embarrassme nt to the family; there was a necessa ry expense in maintaining his remittance cheque , but he was effectively shut away, put out of sight and con sequently out of mind. No, I have no such relative s, I have read of a good many and I think that in this small world in which we live that perhaps both the honourable gentlemen and I might find in res earch that we were related to some . I can't identify any specifically at the moment, l\Ir . Speaker, but I wouldn 't be surprised if somewhere in my back ground there were such a remittance man.

And I suggest that the institution is revived perhaps unwittingly, but revived effectively in the position that the Depa rtment of Tourism, Recrea tion and Cultural Affairs occupies in the thinking, in the spending, and the effort that this government is bringing to the affairs of Manitoba. It 's an embarras sment to the government, Sir, and· as a consequence, it gets its little remittanc e, its little maintenance sum , its $9 million appropriation, but there is no energy or innovation brought to the development of that field, or that industry, or that department, or the cultivation of a future for that industry.

The field seems to be, Sir, an embarrassme nt. I can't find any appreciable evidence of sensibility on the government's part to the kinds of things that the Economic Development Advisory Board talked about when it made those rec ommendations about tourism, and I' d be very interested to hear when we reach a point in this session, Mr . Speaker, where we are considering the Estimates of the Depa rtment of Tourism and Recrea tion, I' d be very interested to hear the Minister outline if there 's any possibility of his doing so - any kind of energetic or innovative approach that would ca use me to change my view s.

Mr . Speak er, one of the most obvious shortcomings, as I mentioned ago , where this department is concerned is the shortcoming, in my view, in the field of adverti sing.

There are ludicrous , expensive , and misplaced adverti sements for the province under the aegis of the Department of Tourism appearing at the present time in America n magazines and I defy the department and the government to justify the expense that 's gone into the placing of some of these adverti sements , and I refer, Sir, and I am happy to table for the reference of members of the House photo copies of two of the most prominent current ones . One appeared two or three weeks ago in the New Yorker Magazine .

It was a full page adverti sement, the headline of which reads "What will they say when they learn you've vac ationed in Manitoba ?" and the illustration is of an effete sophisticated New Yorker inspecting a butterfly through a lorgnette and the copy goes on to talk about this exotic land somewhere in the north of the northern frontier where apparently sophisticated New Yorkers enjoy spending their vaca tion. That adverti sement, Sir, cost if my res earch is correct $4800 to place in the

April 13, 1972 981 (MR . SHERMAN cont'

d) New Yorker Magazine for space alone , and I don't lmow what the production cost would have been but the rule of thumb is generally one to one , and if you include the production cost on that basis it would bring the cost of the ad up somewhere between eight and ten thousand dollars . I would be int erested to be given one scintilla of justification by the Department or the government for that kind of ad and that kind of message . Who do they think they are appealing to, Mr . Speaker ?

Who do they think they are attracting with that kind of an expenditure, and that kind of a message, in that kind of a magazi ne , in that kind of a market ? A similar lu,dicrous example of that kind of adverti sing was a full page ad appearing in a very recent iss ue of Life Magazine , in which the province was described as another Europe , and the head on the ad said "Shortcut to Europe -Drive North" and the copy went on to talk about the perogies , and holopchis, and the other native attractions -natural attractions that we all enjoy and pride ourselves on here in Manitoba but I question, Mr .

Speaker, the advisa bility, and the creativity, and the desirability of that kind of really, what is really sophisti cated advertising when we are trying to attract to this provinc e, tourists who want to come here to enjoy our natural pleasu res, our clean air, our north woods , our good lakes , our good fishing, our sandy beaches, our camping trails, our campground s, and generally enjoy the good but natural uncluttered, untramp led, unsophi sticated life .

I say this kind of advertising messa ge is wasted, useless and ludicrous and it's not worth 10 p9rcent of the money that 's being spent on it, and a great deal of money is being spent on it . This particular ad, this particular ad in Life Magazi ne , as near as I can determine , Mr . Speaker, cost $14, 000 for spac e alone . Now I qualify that statement by saying that 's as near as I can determine . It's very difficult to pinp oint the precise space costs of advertisements in Life Magazine because it depends on the

section of the market that you are purchasing and the Life Magazine advertising market is broken down int o states and provinces and regions , and depending on the kind of market that the department was going for in this particular iss ue of Life, it 's impossible to give you a precise figure but being fair and choosing something between the total market that they could have gone after and the minimum market that they could have gone after, one comes up with a space cost of $1 4, 000 and that 's not counting the production on the ad itself. And I just question , Mr .

Speaker, whether that kind of money , that kind of expense is worth, let alone the $1 4, 000, let alone -is it worth 10 percent of that $14, 000 in terms of whom we are trying to interest in Manitob a, and who we are trying to attract to come to our province ? As I say, Sir, I'll table photocopies of those ads for the edification of members of the House. I am sure most will agree with me, that they are a waste of time and a waste of money . Beyond the shortcomings to be found in that sp here of the admini stration of the departmen t, the advertising and promotion being done, Mr .

Speaker, I seriously question the kinds of personnel who are being used in the whole field of touri sm, recreation and cultural affairs. Who has the department got in the field of tourism who really is oriented to the kinds of scien tific and creative appr oaches that have to be taken to tourism today . I see the Acting Minister of Public Works would like to ask me a question • I wonder if he could just wait until I finish my remarks -I'll be happy to entertain one . I wonder, Mr .

Speaker, whether the department is seeking out the kind of professionals that I referred to a few moments ago, that we need to compete effectively and survive ef fectively in this exercise, in this competition for the tourist dollar .

I don't wish to name names because it's not my inten tion to embarrass any individu als but I commend to members of the government , members opposite , a review and a study of the people who are working in the field of tourism, recreation and cultural affairs for the govern ment, particularly the field of touri sm, and I ask them to review and question seriously whether or not the people who are being brought into the department are really touri st-oriented - a great many of them have had experience in parks busine ss, both at the level of muni cipal parks and at the level of provincial parks , but there is a great, great deal more to the science of tourism and attracting tourists today, Mr .

Speaker, as all of us lmow I am sure, a great deal more than just !mowing something about the proper care and admini stration of parks . Parks and the attractiveness of parks is only an infinitesimal part now of the kind of total offering, total environment , you've got to be able to offer to attract people to come to your part of the country and your part of the continent , and I think that the department makes a great mis take if it fails to go beyond that provincial sphere -and I use provincial not in the sense of the Province of Manitoba but with reference to the confinement of their search to the parks area.

982 April 13, 1972 (MR . SHERMAN cont'

d) They make a great mistake if they don't go beyond that pro - vincial sphere and look for people who now have had their horizons in the science and the field and the art of tourism broadened and developed and honed to the degree where they understand what has to be done in the terms of building package environments, and package attractions, and package values that bring people to your part of the country or to your part of the continent. Mr . Speaker , the government of course cannot be and should not be expected to do it all .

The private sector must play one of the vital and critical roles in developing the tourist po tential of the province , and I would not want to see that role down -graded, but the private sector can't do it all either and it's in the interests of the government that the tourist industry generate input into the economy; it's in the interest of the government that the tourist industry generate revenues for the operations of the government and the tending of the affairs of the people of the province and the government must take its responsibility and its share of responsi bili ty.

And in this respect I was dismayed, Mr. Speaker, to learn the other day in the House that in the opinion of the Acting Minister of Urban Affairs, and I gather in the opinion of the Acting Minister of Public Works, that the province has no responsibility for the promotion of and the effective employment of the new downtown Winnipeg Convention Centre. Now I don't say that that decision is limited to those two honourable gentlemen alone . It's obviously a decision of the province; it is a decision of the government. But I think that decision is illogi cal and wrong , Mr . Speaker .

I can appreciate the politics of making that kind of decision.

There are going to be headaches galore before that Convention Centre effectively achieves its potential in terms of producing business and revenue and generating value in our economy but I don't see how it can do it without initiative and leadership in the development of that potential and in the sale and promotion of that potential and I think the Provincial Government will have to give a substantial amount of that innovation and that leadership, and I urgently request of the two honourable gentlemen to whom I have referred that they and their colleagues reconsider that decision notwithstanding the political risks involved.

I don't think the Convention Centre can made it, can measure up to and achieve its full potential unless there is initiative under taken now to promote it across Canada and the United States, to go out and sell it, to solicit trade and conventions for its use immediately upon its opening, and for as many months and years thereafter as can be scheduled right now, _and it can't be done without the kind of clout that the Provincial Government can give that kind of work . There is no general manager, there is no sales force working as such for the Convention Centre at this time.

We are probably a year and a half away from its completion, but a year and a half is a negligible period of time, Mr . Speaker, in terms of the marketing that has to be done to attract the conventions that we '11 be competing for against cities like Calgary , Toronto, Vancouver , and many many more , and witho ut a general manager and a sales force, and without initiative and leadership and direction and imagination from the Provincial Government, the thing is liable , in dager of turning out to be a bust, Mr .

Speaker, to be a costly experiment that isn't worthy of living up to the kind of investment we made in it and the kinds of dreams that we have for it, and this is what we fear most of all if the provincial government is not willing to take some responsibil ity. As I said I -- (Interjection) -- The First Minister says I 'm suggesting that the city is incompetent.

I 'm not suggesting the city is incompetent, I may be suggesting that the city is incapable of doing it simply by itself without the -- (Interjection) --Well I believe the first thing that's necessary is for the appointment, the immediate appointment of a management and sales force that can go out and promote this thing, and there's nobody that I can see in the city wh o' s taking the leader ship in that field at the moment.

Now ifthe Acting Minister of Urban Affairs would take that leadership; if he were able to get himself into a position where he could do it and initiate that kind of immediate action, I for one would be highly grateful to him, Mr. Speaker, and I think most Manitobans woul d because I believe it's necessary . Mr . Speaker , there is another concept that I commend to the government in this field and that is the concept of regionalization as against centralization where tourism is concerned.

I believe and I've said outside this House as well as in it that one of the great problems we face in Manitoba is the problem of being a one-city province. We don't have the kind of healthy rivalry and competition between two or three relatively major urban centres that many other provi:nc es have and I think this to Manitoba is a disadvantage and I've always wanted to see centres like Brandon and Dauphin -- and I don't mean to omit any but I 'm just taking two examples - -and Thompson flourished as growin g, expanding, viable, dynamic communities

April 13, 1972 983 (MR . SHERMAN cont'

d) that can in the not too distant future become strong enough to compete with Winnipeg in many many areas . I think that would work as much to the advantage of Winnipeg as it would to the advantage of those communities themselves and certainly to the total overall advantage of Ma nitoba and I believe this concept has -- (Interjection) -- I beg your pardon? Well, I like Steinbach -I include Steinbach in that category but this, Sir, I suggest has to be done in the field of tourism, too.

There are many many different regional attractions throughout the province that have to be developed and a program -- and·a concept of central ization in tourism is not advantageous to those other parts of our province.

I believe that the Minister and the government should look at a possibility of making a thorough breadown in terms of areas and regions of the province from a tourist and tourist potential point of view, and developing programs that encompass as many as those individual areas as possible and do not focus specifically , purely and uniquely on Winnipeg as it's been all too often the case in the past . Mr . Speaker . . . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member has five minutes. MR. SHERMAN : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There thus then arises the que stion, Mr .

Speaker, as to whether the Department of Tourism and the government itself is structured to think in those creative terms where tourism and recreation and cultural aff airs is. concerned, and I pose that question for the consideration of the Minister and! the Honourable the First Minister and all their colleagues. Is, Mr.

Speaker, is in fac t that kind of thinking, that kind of approach possible in the department the way it's structured, setup, headed and administered at the present time; and if not then I would recommend a restructuring, a breakdown and a restructuring along those lines so that the attractions of Manitoba can be packaged in a form that enables all regions of the province to share in the potential that we have and m their right to compete like all other parts of North America for tourists and for tourist revenue . Mr .

Speaker , in the two or three minutes left at my disposal, I want to move from these specific and pure field of tourism to the field of cultural affair s, and ask the government and the Minister also to undertake a searching examination or re-examination of the kinds of commitments that the province is taking to cultural organizations and institutions and groups , and to the needs of many of those cultural organizations have at this present time .

One of the most informative and one of the most effective pieces of information outlining the contributions made by some of the cultural organizations in this province to appear on my desk in many, many months if not years is the publication, the pamphlet that was recently issued by the Royal Winnipeg Ballet stressing the kind of contribution that the Ballet makes to the province and underlining the Ballet's appeal for a larger provincial and civic grant in the coming year in order to maintain its programs .

The Ballet of course is only one of a number of cultural institutions of this type that are in a state of intense anxiety at the moment over the possible loss of some substantial element of funding from the Ci ty of Winnipeg .

The Winnipeg Symphony Orchestra and the Festival d' Voyageur and other cultural organizations and groups are sweating out that problem at the present time with the ballet , and I would request again of the Minister as I have done earlier in this ses sion that he use all his good of fices and all the good offices of the First Minister and their colleagues to ensure that that kind of institution does not suffer and wither and perish for lack of support from the people of Manitoba through provincial revenues.

One highly successful cultural institution of that kind which was based in Eastern Canada, Les Feux Follets, is in danger of going right out of existence, Mr . Speaker , at this very time because of a cut-back in the funding available to it in eastern Canada .

I would think that all Manitobans would agree that that would be a tragic situation should it develop for our institutions and cultural groups here in the Province of Manitoba; and the only ultimate solution to the problem is going to be the development of the tourist industry to the level where the revenues will be available to support this kind of enterprise without having to worry it out and sweat it out and go through the agony and the crisis of financing and funding every year the way they're doing at the present time . MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR . LEONARD A.

BARKMAN (La Verendrye): Mr . Speaker , MR . SPEAKER: Order, please . Does the Honourable First Minister have a point of order? MR. SCHREYER: Yes I have . My point of ord er, Mr. Speaker, relates to one of those unwritterr conventions of this House ... MR . SPEAKER: Order , please . I'm anticipating what the First Minister is saying . If

984 April 13, 1972 (MR . SPEAKER cont'd! ..... the members don't rise , I cannot call them . --(Interjectio n)- ! was looking at all sides of the Ho use. There was no member rising . In fact I intended to call on the Mini ster of Agriculture and just as I was going to he sat down . I cannot call on a mem ber who is in his seat . The Honourable Member for La Verendrye. MR. BARKMAN: Thank you, Mr . Speaker.

I hope I 'm not standing in the way of anybody wi shing to speak but I think you 're perfectly correct in saying there was nobody -- and perhaps a little later when m·ore are coming back from the hockey game maybe the Mini ster will want to get up, because I really had no intention of getting up at this time nor at any time during this debate other than when I was a bit -- got a little bit touched this afternoon by a few of the speeches that were made in this House . Now, Mr . Speaker, _it's been very interesting to note and to listen to the many positions that members have taken from either side .

I think we all realize by now going into the seventh day tomorrow or so that we have a lot of problems in }\'lanitoba. Leave alone our housing problems , leave alone our many other problems -- and I rather cheered up by the last speaker when he talked quite a bit on our future as far as tourism is concerned and perhaps he could have included recreation.

I don't have to remind anybody that tourism is one of the brighter spots that we can look forward to in thi s province and perhaps across Canada; and I also don't have to remind anybody that the invitation that I gave out the other day - Falcon Lake is still one of the brighter and the better spots in Manitoba and fortunately it happens to be in the right constituency also . As I said before , I didn't really have any intention of getting up but I was rather moved this afternoon when the Member for St.

Vital got up, and I don't really know what his intentions were and I wish to believe that they were not what I think they might have been; but I think to me at least thi s was very hurting because it's taken so many years to try and heal what 's gone on between urban and rural centres; and I think that to a great extent this has been healed over the years and I 'm not so sure that he wasn't trying to pit the urban people against the rural people this afternoon.

But I hope not because from some of the things he said one could gather that perhaps he was, but I wish to think that he wasn't, and if he was I' m sure that the residents of St . Vital know better and I hope that he is not trying to open a wound that's finally I think to a great extent been healed . And I am sincere and this is part of the reason why I thought I wanted to get up and say a few words concerning more of our problems as far as agriculture is con cerned . I want to direct most of my remarks to the specific monies spent on the agricultural marketing research .

In a world of salesmanship that we're living in today I think we have to and we must devote more time and monies in selling our products, in selling our surpluse s, the agricultural commodities basi cally -- and I think we agree that according to the annual report that we just received of 1970 and 71 of the Manitoba Department of Agriculture the value of agricultural production will vary from what the Member of Morris gave us, and of course what the Es timates show over the last three years . ·B ut I think we can safely say that it was around the 477 million mark in 1969 and roughly around the 471 million-dollar mark and of course a little bit lower in the 1971 as far as the Manitoba Estimates were given .

It can rather be seen, Mr . Speaker , that agriculture makes a significant , although I have to admit regretfully - diminishing -- in those three years' contribution to this province' s gross provincial product, and I' m happy to hear that while their net profits are not climbing the way they should we have reached the over half-billion dollar mark last year, but as far as the members are concerned it 's pretty hard to tell before -- especially when our Estimates in agriculture or annual reports come in at such a late date. And as I am sure, Mr .

Speaker , would agree the magnitude of the contribution of agriculture production and marketing to the well-being of the ec onomy of this province is by no way limit ed to the value of farm goods produced but also includes the value added to our provincial economy by the demands placed on so many other sectors, other sectors by the very large consumption of farm production inputs and also perhaps by the money spent by our hard working and productive farmers .

It also incl udes as we know, the thousands of jobs and the millions of dollars in goods and servic es that are involved in processing distribution and consumption of the products of this province . Perhaps not only of this province but right across we stern Canada and for that matter right across the whole nation. But needless to say where there is prosperity in the farm sector of Manitoba's economy there is prosperity in the towns, villages and across the whole province . But unfortunately this also holds true when there is not progress and when the economy is not

April 13, 1972 985 (MR . BARKMAN cont'd) .. .. . doing so well . And I was very interested in listening to the Member for Roblin before when he opened up and mentioned a few o� the things that are taking place and I' m sure that most members are aware of some of the schools-that are closing; and the churches are closing and the services are disappearing and in the case of many rural points, rural life is becoming a real hardship. --(Interjection)-- ! thought that Ministers were not supposed to be shooting around. I am not only talking of Ministers of the Crown now. Mr.

Speaker, there will be little argument in this House today with reference to the difficulties being experienced by our farmers, we are aware of this . I don't think that I have to spend a lot of time in dwelling on this.

But my main point that I wish to make, I don't think that we are spending enough time and enough monies as far as selling our products are concerned and I think that our budget must include monies where we can do a better job than we have been doing; regardless if we 're depending on Federal Governments; re gardless if we are depending on failures of crops in other parts of the world, I think our own salesmanship in this province has to improve, and for that to happen I realize that our market ing research has to have more monies to accomplish this point.

And I think it is rather a sad fact when you find out that in the year 1969, 1970 we had a 70 percent decline in the net income during the unfortunate time that I just mentioned. And, Mr . Speaker, this terrible decline in the viability of our farm sector has partly occurred during the unfortunate tenure of this govern ment.

I think it is only fair to say that while we so often blame our Federal Governments I was very happy to listen to the Minister of Finance the other day when he made it clear -- and I think we are all aware of the fact that under the BNA Act it is one of the responsibilities and we must accept that responsibility as members of this House , and also as the government of Manitoba; and, Mr. Speaker, at this juncture it is not enough to say what ought to be done.

I think the time has come where there has to be some action taken now and not only do I refer again to the Federal Government or the Provincial but by all members of this House . Now, Mr . Speaker , we can turn our attention to the monies allotted to agriculture and one can only conclude in consideration of these proposed expenditures that once again if we are going to go at it in a piecemeal way, if we are going to go at it as we have in the past we are again going to miss the boat.

And I think as responsible members of this House there's no way that we should remain content to limit the role of this government to take part to a degree; and I think if you take the amount that I mentioned before, and thinking only of a figure of $450 million instead of the half-billion dollar that we reached, we are actually as far as marketing research is concerned taking only a part to a percentage of . 036 percent in our agriculture commodity as our estimates of this year suggest.

There is no way that the members of this House , and I include all of us , should remain content to contribute a lousy, call it if you like, but a very low .0 36 ; on the overall total it comes even to a lower figure of . 006367 percentage of our provincial budget and this is one of my main complaints and one of the reasons that I got up. I think we can do better. We don't have to refer to the Americans eating chicken in the streets of Sweden and Germany and other countries . I think we have to refer to ourselves to become better salesmen as far as our agri cultural commodities are concerned . Mr .

Speaker, the farmers of this province are plagued by the continued existence of governments and I' m including this government who seem to misunderstand, who seem to mis understand the needs of our rural people . And I think an example of that was given this after noon -- but I want to give the Honourable Member for St.

Vital the benefit of the doubt, because I realize that this is a matter that's been -- people in the cities have been listening to for so long that I'm sure that it is hard to understand that a problem can exist as long as the agri culture problem has existed in Manitoba, and across Western c, nada for that matter.

And I think I can safely say that if some of the members in this House realized the time investment of people as far as agriculture is concerned, the energy put in, the costs of land involved, the labour and the capital and the managerial skills, the new technology, the blood and the sweat for that matter, the love in a way of life -- I think we really have to get closer to the matter before we can really understand this. Now, Mr .

Speaker, without markets, without research and development in the area of national and international sales, without maximum effort in servicing existing outlets for our farm goods, and the continued search for new and innovative uses and applications of the fruits of what our farmers are raising, or the farmers' labour - there isn't going to be a future for the present farmer, nor for their sons nor daughters in the rural sector, I am happy to report,

986 April 13, 1972 (MR . BARKMAN cont'd) . . •.• Mr. Speaker, that I 'm very unhappy to report, Mr. Speaker, that New York edged out Montreal by one goal and the game is over. --(Interjection)-- Mr . Speaker , the unconcern and at times indifference of things -- and I'm referring again to the amounts of money spent on things where we could have definitely improved ourselves.

And I 'm speaking to every member of this House when we talk of a figure of half a billion dollars and we're ready only -- even if it's increase of over $1 00 , 000 from last year -- but we 're ready only to spend a sum of approximately $28 6, 000 . Again I say, tbis is one of the main complaints and we 'll have to show different salesmanship.

And this is a must if we wish to have our markets expand; if we wis h to prove that we can produce our commodities perhaps more eco nomical than any otber province in Canada; if we wish to prove -- and if the Federal Govern ments for tbat matter or other Provincial Governments are lacking -- we have to prove as far as Manitoba is concerned that we can do this and we must do this . Mr. Speaker, I suggest also that this government would do far better to assist the farmers themselves to organize their own representative groups .

I suggest that this government formu late and pass legislation that will allow tbe producers of specified commodities to form com modity groups to serve their own members . I am sure that the Minister will say we have done this to some extent but we have not done it to an extent far enough to cover tbe real needs and the wishes that tbe actual farmer wishes. By way of justification of my suggestion, Mr.

Speaker, allow me to point out that one of the most important factors that has been miss ing from the agricultural economy in we stern Canada and more importantly in Manitoba, has been the presence of the farmer himself . And I wis h to make this very clear and I want to be understood that I do not mean the farmer's self appointed politcal leaders have been absent from the scene nor do I mean that we have suffered a shortage of well intentioned bureaucrats .

These type have been crawling around before this government came in and before the previous government came in and they've been crawling around since time began and I tbink tbere has to be a change in this respect. There has been too much politics, too much bureaucracy in the farm economy of this province - for too long. I think it is about time that this government or any government con sent to let the farmer play a larger role in determining his own social and his own economic destiny and I say that, let governments help, give them the tools, but let governments give this individual farmer some elbow room.

In fact, I may even suggest get out of his way and let him move. I don't have to give you an example, because the member for Roblin just a little while ago explained how successful their group in Grandview have been . We can go on and talk about the Pelletier Wheat Growers Ass ociation. They were not satisfied that they needed only help from governments - they went on their own and they proved on tbeir own that it could be done and I think we can refer to quite a few other marketing boards . There are needs - somebody may say I may be standing in the middle of the road .

There are needs for marketing boards at times but let us make sure that the producer controls these . Mr. Speaker, it should be made clear that given the net income position of Manitoba's farmers -- and it's likely continuance of the sorry state of affairs as has been reported -- we have seen a little bit of an upshot the last three to six months and just what the reason for them are, I don't know, but I am sure that all of us are happy that they are taking place.

It should be clear that if the limited resources they do have at their disposal are going to be tapped off by check offs and the like that one normally associates with operations of call it government dominated marketing boards if you like, not to mention higher and higher levels of taxation, that govern ments seem -- and again I include not only this government but I include them and other govern ments -- seem bent on imposing that our farmers will have no option but to submit the continu ance of the paternalism of all governments.

If farmers are going to be told that marketing boards are government organized and spon sored organizations that are being established to protect their rights and to further their in terest -- if they're going to have to pay the shot for their operations through check-offs or through taxes then I think we have to agree then they should have the right to elect the officers responsible for the administration and the operation of that particular board, and they should have the right to determine the level of check-offs and the uses to which their funds are being put to; and I think they should also have the right to hire and to fire -- if you wis h to use those terms -- personnel that function on their behalf.

They should have also the right to formulate and to approve all tbe programs connected with the operation of these boards and I think anything

April 13, 1972 987 (MR . BARKMAN cont'd) ..•.. less is unacceptable . Mr . Speaker, I wish to say a little bit more as far as I think perhaps that the - another reason the tragedy is that the Manitoba farmer is being consistently denied - simply denied the opportunity to bring his resources and his skills to bear on the proplem he recognizes -- very often better than even civil servants in some cases -- while they are trying to do their utmost, but they are not too often -- they're not close enough tQ the immediate problems. And I think I could also mention the provision of high quality.

They reali ze, the farmers themselves real ize how to raise the more inexpensive food; the raw mate rials of a rem arkably varied kind that we have for all the people of our province; and for that matter for the nation; and for that matt er, for many other nations . Mr . Speaker, present and future generations of Manitoba will not regard lightly the narrowness of the imagination of governments that do not want to adhere to some of the things that I have mentioned. Of governments -- their failure to grasp the fundamental needs of our farmers .

They're setting up too often -- governments are setting up roadblocks to progress by failing, by simply failing to encourage, failing to assist, failing to promote very often healthy financially independent farm organizati ons; and I could also say bas ically their disa strous in competence in the area of constructive response to the need for markets for Manitoba farm products .

Also the tragedy is not so much what this government is doing or has done -- the tragedy is not so much what is going to happen if this government fails to find more solutions -- what is going to come to pass - that is the real unforgiveable thing is -- what is going to come to pass in the future and not what is the past -- we may have to take a lot of steps that we don't wish to take but we may have to; and I say that the tragedy is if we do not find solutions in the future, this is the unforgiveable thing. And I would suggest, Mr .

Speaker, in the strong est possible terms that this government resolve to do justice to the productive ca pacity and this is one of the reasons I am rising . I feel that our sale smanship, our ways, our means of selling our products have not been good enough -I think we have to bear down and take a different atti tude in this respect and I know that the Minister has in some respects been trying to improve matt ers, but this is still not good enough. We have to go further and this is simply a must and I think we can do it . Mr . Speaker, I •ve dealt at some length on the importance of marketing research .

I in tend to bring up other matte rs as our agricultural estimate s come up, but on conclusion I be lieve the time has come -- and I wish to reiterate that we cannot keep on depending on neces sarily Federal Governments or what some of our sister provinces are going to do. We 'll have to take some of our own action; we 'll have to do this and make sure that things will change . And there is no doubt in my mind that the farmer given the opportunity and governments willing to assist, and for that matter this whole House, there 's no doubt in my mind that things will improve.

I was rather sorry to hear the Member for Ste . Rose was rather, oh I might suggest, rather sarcas tic as far his remarks about my leader was concerned. I think he has a right to say that . I do n't know how often in life he has tried to do certain things and he didn't always succeed at first -- for sometimes when this happens our hurt becomes -- increases and of course when others are tryiug we see how other people are quite hurt at time s. Perhaps that hurt passes on to the next person.

I was rather surprised though when I heard the Member for Inkster, the former Minister of Mines and Natural Resources, who is usually such an intelligent, such a ca reful, very eloquent debater . I think he tried to say the things that he felt that he had to say; I'm not just too sure that he really said what he me ant to say. I don't usually hear him ask questions; I notice a lot of political members do .

They'll ask questions when they wa nt to say something and I was rather surprised that usually having this perfect balance that the Member for Inkster didn't quite seem to be his usual self, and I couldn't help - I hope he'll forgive me if I bring this up - but I couldn 't help but think of the famous words of Henry Longfellow, the poet that lived from 1802-82 , and I don't know if he said this in his 80th year, or in his 70th, or his 60th -- but the way the honourable member was going, I couldn't help but think when Longfellow said: "Some critic s are like chimney sweepers; they put out the fire below and frighten the swallows from their nests above; they scrape a long time in the chimney, cover themselves with soot and bring nothing away but a bag of cinders and then sing out from the top of the house as·if they had built it ." MR.

SPEAKER: Are you ready for the question ? The Honourable Member for Sturgeon

988 April 13, 1972 (MR . SPEAKER cont'd) ..••• Cr eek. MR. FRANK JOHNSTON (Sturgeon Cr eek): Well, Mr . Speaker , I was going to suggest that it's only a few minutes to 10 . If the House would like to call it 10 o'clock, Sir, fine. If not, I'll carry on. MR . SPEAKER: Agreeable ? Very well . The hour being 10 o'clock, the House is accord ingly adjourned and stands adjourned until 10:0 0 A.M. Friday morning. Mr .

Green 's French Speech April 12 , 1972 : Je veux, Monsieur Speaker, que Monsieur Asper se regarde un peu et sugge re au peuple du Manitoba qu 'il ne s 'intE:lresse pas dans le fait de nos deux culture s d 'en la Province du Manitoba et dans noter . I would like, Mr . Speaker, that Mr . Asper take a good look at himself and I would also like the people of Manitoba to note that he is not interested in Manitoba's two cultures.

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	29-4-39
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	29th 4th hansardpdf 39.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	f2c9d42d7819537916aaa5a7892fb66522a5bf88

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