Manitoba Hansard — 16 December 1991 (Sitting 8A, 35th Legislature, 3rd Session)

35-3-8a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

MG-8048 Third Session - Thirty-Fifth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS {HANSARD) 40 Elizabeth II Published under the authority of The Honourable Denis C. Rocan Speaker VOL. XLI No. SA ·1:30 p.m., MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1991 Printed by the Office of the Queens Printer. Province of Manitoba ISSN 0542-5492

MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Fifth Legislature LIB - Liberal; ND - New Democrat; PC - Progressive Conservative NAME ALCOCK, Reg ASHTON, Steve BARRE lT, Becky CARR, James CARSTAIRS, Sharon CER I LLI, Marianne CHEEMA, Guizar CHOMIAK, Dave CONNERY, Edward CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACOUAY, Louise DE RKACH, Leonard, Hon. DE WAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNE Y, James, Hon. DR IE DGER, Albert, Hon. DUCHARME, Gerry, Hon. EDWARDS, Paul ENNS, Harry, Hon. ERNS T, Jim, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRI ESEN, Jean GAUDR Y, Neil GIUESHAM MER, Harold, Hon.

HARPER, Elijah HELWER, Edward R. HICKES, George LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MALOWAY,Jim MANNESS, Clayton, Hon. MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon. MITCH ELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEUFELD, Harold, Hon. OR CHARD , Donald, Hon. PENNER, Jack PLOH MAN, John PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RE ID , Daryl RE IM ER, Jack REND ER, Shirley ROCAN, Denis, Hon. ROSE, Bob SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon.

STORIE , Jerry SVEINSON, Ben VODRE Y, Rosemary WASYL YCIA-LEI S, Judy WOWCHUK, Rosann CONSTITUENCY Osborne Thompson Wellington Crescentwood River Heights Radisson The Maples Kildonan Portage Ia Prairie Ste. Rose Seine River Roblin- Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Riel St. James Lakeside Charleswood Interlake Brandon East Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Rupertsland Gimli Point Douglas Inkster The Pas St. Norbert Elmwood Morris Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Assiniboia River East Rossmere Pembina Emerson Dauphin Lac du Bonnet Transcona Niakwa St.

Vital Gladstone Turtle Mountain Broadway Kirkfield Park Ain Flon La Verendrye Fort Garry St. Johns Swan River PARTY. LIB ND ND LIB LIB NO LIB ND PC PC PC PC NO NO PC PC PC LIB PC PC ND NO PC PC ND LIB PC ND PC ND LIB ND PC ND PC ND PC PC PC PC PC PC PC NO PC NO PC PC PC PC ND PC NO PC PC NO ND

286 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, December 16, 1991 The House met at 1 :30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS TABLING OF REPORTS Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for 19 90-91 of the Department of Urban Affairs. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I have se veral tablings , firstly, the Quarterly Rn ancial Report for the year ended October 31 , 19 91 , of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation.

I would also like to table the Public Accounts, Volumes 1 and 2, Rn ancial Statements for the Con soli dated Fu nd, plus Sup plem en tary Information, fiscal year 19 90- 91 . I would also like to table a rep ort to the Legislature, pursuant to

Section 56(3) of The Financial Admi nistration Act rela ting to Supplementary Loan and Guarantee Authority. I am also making a report to the Legislature under

Section 20 of The Public Officer s Act, being

Chapter P230 of the Continued Consolidation of the Statutes of Manitoba. This deals with surety bond issues that I am required to table. Finally, I would like to table a report of the Provincial Auditor to the Legislative Assembly for the fiscal year ended March 31 , 19 91 . Mr.

Speaker, at this time, I would like to announce that the 19 90-91 Public Accounts, the 19 91 Report of the Provincial Auditor and the Special Audit of the Provincial Auditor on the Taxation Division of the Departm ent of Finance will be referred for consideration to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts for the committee meeting previously announced for December 17 . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Sp eaker, I ha ve a statement for the Ho use, and I have copies for all honourable members today. Mr.

Speaker, today I am asking Manitobans to pause and remember the victims of drunk drivers. Earlier this morning, I launched the "ribbons for life" cam paig n, enc ourag ing ever yone, including members of this Ho use, to display red ribbons on their vehicles and homes over the holiday season. I urge everyone to exe rcise an extra degree of caution. Our Manitoba policing agencies will be enforcing the laws on impaired driving with particular care in the weeks to come. We need to remind ourselves why these laws are in place.

It is not because we want to disc ourage people from enjo ying thems elves, but the sim pie truth is that drunk drivers kill innocent people. Let us remember those families whose holiday celebrations will be overshadowed by memories of loved ones struck down by drunk drivers. Our laws are tough, the toughest in Canada, but they are necessary. We are determined to get off our streets and highways those drivers who endanger others by disregarding the law, safety and common sense.

Let us join others who have said no to drinking and driving, and attach one of these ribbons to the door handle of our cars , our radio antennas, our front doors, anywhere that it can be easily seen. Let us all do our utmost to make sure that impaired drivers do not get behind the wheel, particularly during this holiday season. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. *** * (1 335) Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of the New Democratic Party, I would like to commend the minister for recognizing the fact that there are victims of this senseless and tragic act and that we on this side of the House will do everything possible to try to prevent and try to assist the gove rnment in improving this situation and improving the regulations and the laws that are in effect to ensure that campaigns of this kind are not necessary now or in the future, particularly during the holiday season, during a period of time when individuals turn their attention to their loved ones and turn their attention to thoughts other than having

287 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANIT OBA December 16 , 19 91 to deal with the horrendous memor y and the horrendous tragedy that it is associated with, this red ribbon campaign, and the fact that individuals have, particularly during the Christmas season, had to face the consequence of the loss of a loved one or a family member or a relative. I can assure you that we on this side of the House will do everythi ng that we can to assist the minister in ensuring that the laws are enforced , ensuring regulations are enforced. Indeed, Mr.

Speaker, we on this side of the House will do everythi ng possible to try to improve this situation in the province of Manitoba, not only the laws and regulations, but everything dealing around the whole concept of individuals who abuse the privilege of driving. We will be offering, not only in this session but following the recess, positive suggestions in this regard to ensure that, as I said earlier in my comments, we do not have to have campaigns of this kind ever again in the province of Manitoba.

With those brief comments, we commend the minister on taking this step, and we will be offering very positive solutions to a very difficult problem and a very difficult situation in our society. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. *** Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, on behalf of our party, I also want to join with the comments of the minister, join with his important words at this season in which many are out and about. Some unfortunately are still abusing the privilege of driving and trying to combine it with the drinking of alcoholic beverages.

That indeed is a tragedy which is wrought on citizens around this province every year all too frequently. I feel compelled to request yet agai n from the mi nister-and I know he and I have join ed comments on this on many occasions before . The Christmas season is one in which we particularly think about drinking and driving, but indeed, it is a year-round problem. It is a year-rou nd problem which I believe can be addressed best through the information to people who may choose to drink and drive that they will be caught, because that is the thing which we learned from the studies that are done.

It is thatthose who are still drinking and driving are doing it in large part, not because they do not know the consequences will be horrendous if they are caught, but because they think they will not get caught. That indeed is a fallacy. We need to get that message out. This is part of getting that message out, and I appreciate that. I simply want to pick up on the comment from the minister that the police will be enforcing the laws on impaired driving with particular care in the weeks to come.

I look forward to the day when we have the sort of ALERT programs year round in this province, which I believe will be necessary and will in time come. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, from the Linden Meadows School , eightee n Grade 9 students. They are under the direction of Cindy Tinsley. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

On behalf of all honour able memb ers, we welcome you here this afternoon. * (1 340) ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Provincial Auditor's Report Manitoba Data Services Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Finance. We have just had an opportunity to review some of the sections in the Auditor's report, Mr. Speaker, and some of these issues that are raised give us very direct concern about answers the Minister of Finance has provided to the House and people of Manitoba in past years.

We have raised the issue of Manitoba Data Services in terms of its confidentiality of information, and the Minister of Finance has repeatedly said to people in this Chamber and the people of the province of Manitoba that the confidentiality is not an issue that we should be concerned about.

Yet the Auditor's report, which we just received, makes very direct stateme nts about the conf identiality of informatio n, and im provements are required to achieve adequate monitoring of controls in the Manitoba Data Services to ensure accurate and complete processing of inform ation and appropriate safeguarding over confidential information and data. I ask the Minister of Finance why he told this Chamber last year that confidentiality was not a

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 288 problem and why now the Auditor is telling us it is a problem for Manitobans? Hon. Clayton Man ness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I got to give credit to the leader of the NDP. I mean, he had the document for a whole three or four minutes, and he took out of it, in that space of time, exactly what we wanted; yet what he did take out, he took completely out of context. The Provincial Auditor was asked to look at the divestiture process of Manitoba Data Services. Indeed, I do not have time to quote

chapter and verse what he says. Indeed, everything was done open up, everything was done in a proper fashion, and indeed, if I wanted to read it out of context, I would say it was a model divestiture by the Provincial Auditor's work. Mr. Speaker, we acknowledge there was a sensitive area of maintaining secrecy of information.

We indicated that there had to be monitoring procedure in place, and indeed, as pointed out within the Auditor's report, page 17, Comments of Officials, the info office of the Department of Finance indicates that an audit is being scheduled for the second quarter of 19 92, as we said would happen, as we said would go to safegua rd all of the sensitive infor mation that was held in the past by Manitoba Data Services, is held, but under the control then, as it is now, under the government of the province of Manitoba. Mr.

Doer: Of course, the minister can talk all he wants about it, but it said, improveme nts are re quired to achieve adequate dealings of the confidentiality of information of Manitoba Data Services. Those are not just obscure facts, Mr. Speaker. These are the health care records of Manitobans . Thes e are other very-l icensing records, the Agricultural Credit Corp oration records, so we would suggest these are very important issues. Fiscal Stabilization Fund Mr.

Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): A further question to the minister of divestiture, the Minister of Finance of the Province of Manitoba, we have raised rep eatedly that the Auditor has stated that the $77 million in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund should not be placed in that fund, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Finance has repeatedly defended that decision. Again, the Auditor has stated that it creates confusion on behalf of Manitobans reading that report. We would note that every budget report has that money in the Fiscal Stabilization.

I would ask the Minister of Finance why he continues to place that fund in the Fiscal Stabilization Fund when, in fact, it is not an asset for purposes of the people of Manitoba? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I will at another time, I suppose, address my comments or finish my comments with respect to the security aspect of Manitoba Data Services divestiture. The member asked a question dealing with the lodging of the value of shares through the divestiture of Manfor and the lodging of the value of those sh ares within the stabilization account.

The Provincial Auditor and the government are at odds as to where the value of those shares should be lodged. Indeed, as we have sa id on several occasions , wher e does one take extraordinary income or the value, and where do they do it? Do they apply it against one year, one year in which it comes, or is it better to take the value, put it into account and share the receipts over a period of time? We have gone one step further. We said not a dollar of that will be spent until it has materialized. That is stated. That is stated very clearly.

I have said that 20 times if I have said it once, and I will say it again. To me it is an academic discussion. Indeed, of the $77 million, not $1 will be spent until it materializes. * (1 345) Mr. Doer: Well, I guess that begs the question, Mr. Speaker, some Fiscal Stabilization Fund. You have $77 million in a fund that is worth not $1 , as the Minister of Finance has just told us in this Chamber.

Notwithstanding the fact that we have not the jobs in either one of these divestitures of Re pap, we have not the jobs of the divestiture of Data Services, notwithstanding the job boasts from the government opposite, I would ask the Minister of Rn ance, would he end the confusion and take that fund, that asset that is not an asset, out of the Fiscal Stabilization Fund so all Manitobans will really know what is an asset in the fund and what is just a public re lations gesture of the Minister of Finance in the budget? Mr. Manness: Two points Mr. Speaker. At least, when we set up a fund, we put money into it.

We put in $2 00 million or $300 million, not like the Energy and Heritage Fund of the members opposite, where

289 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 the glowing legislation came forward, and after four years, there was not $1 that went into it. Mr. Speaker, the Provincial Auditor never asked us to take the asset away. He asked us to set up a liability, an allowance against that was equivalent to the asset. We have said, as an offset against that, we will not in any way call upon a dollar of the value of those shares. Indeed, we are not playing a shell game. We are fully disclosing where the value is. We are fully disclosing that indeed a dollar will not be spent until that value is realized.

That is an open way of accounting, and we defy any member to tell us opposite. Impaired Drivers Reporting Delay Mr. Dave Chomlak (KIIdonan): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for the Motor Vehicle Branch. We have confirmed that, in some cases, from the time a drunken driver is convicted until the conviction shows up at the Motor Vehicle Branch or on police records, a period of six weeks can pass, Mr. Speaker.

How can the minister, in the light of the Justice minister's announcement and constant press conferences on drunk drivers, allow drunk drivers to be on the road potentially for a period of six weeks? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I follow the honourable mem ber's question, and perhaps in his supplementary, he will make that clear. My understanding of Bill 3 is that, upon apprehension, an alleged drunk driver's licence is taken, a seven- day permit given, and then, after seven days, the licence is no good.

The permit is then no good for a period of 90 days. Mr. Chomlak: Mr. Speaker, perhaps if the minister can check with his staff, they can confirm the fact-in my supplementary, the minister can find out for us why, from a period of conviction on trial until the Motor Vehicle Branch puts it on its records, six weeks can pass and the individual can be out there driving before the police or anyone else will know that person is convicted. Mr. McCrae: I will check into th at, but th e honourable member should acknowledge, the accused knows he is suspended and ought not to be driving.

If he or she is apprehended driving suspended, the car will be impounded, and now, as a result of legislation in the last session, that imp oundmen t will be double d to 60 days impoundment on subsequent offences. The point is, the accused knows. As I say, I will check on it. If there is any delay in recording this kind of information, we will see what we can do about it. Mr. Chomlak: I can assure the minister there is a six-week delay. I would like to ask my supplementary. Why does the minister not know?

Why does the minister of the Motor Vehicle Branch not know that people can be on the road for six weeks when they are drunk drivers, and the police and no one else can find out about it? Mr. McCrae: I was not aware, Mr. Speaker, that they changed the procedure in court. The driver's licence is suspended, if there is one, is relinquished at that time, if it has not been taken previously, which it is under Bill 3. If more than 90 days have passed before a person gets to court, the judge takes a person's licence. • (1 350) Economic Growth Government Initiatives Mrs.

Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the First Minister has staked his entire political reputation upon his ability to manage the economy. Those are his words. All Manitobans have seen so far is a strange two-st ep dance around Manitobans. There seems to be some disagreement as to who is doing the leading. Is it the Premier or is it the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness)? For example, we have a Minister of Finance saying that he has to, in fact, control social programs, and we have a denial from the Premier that that is the thrust to the economic initiative of this government. Mr.

Speaker, will the First Minister sit down with his Finance minister and establish an economic agenda so that they will stop this two-s tep dance around each other without any knowledge of who is doing the leading? Hon. Gary Fllmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I am entirely unaware of what the lea der of the liberal Party is getting at. Perhaps by her second question, I will have a better indication of what she is after.

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASS EM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 290 First Ministers' Conference Government Agenda Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs {Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr . Speak er , not only do they disagree about the thrust, one given by the Minister of Finance and denied by the Premier of the province, but we had the spectre of the Premier calling for a Fi rst Ministers' conference and, on television on Friday night, the Finance minister, in fact, suggesting that this could be a very negative process.

Can the Rrst Minister tell this House today, since his Finance minister did not have any to share with the other Finance ministers, what new, innovative ideas he will be taking to Thursday's meeting? Hon. Gary Fllmon {Premier): Mr. Speaker, I am firstly very pleased that the feder al government, in response to the letter that I sent on December 9 to the Prime Minister, has agreed to the holding of a First Ministers' conference on the economy. I am also informed that, as a result of urgings by our Minister of Finance (Mr.

Manness) and indeed all Ministers of Finance across the country, the feder al Minister of Rn ance, Mr. Mazankowski, in the midst of his discussions with the Finance ministers, left to meet with the Prime Minister and had discussions with him that resulted in ultimately the feder al government making that decision. It seems to me that everybody was on board. Everybody was working in the same direction, and everybody was asking for the First Ministers' conference on the economy.

As a result of the combined efforts of var ious First Ministers in the country, who urged the feder al government and the Finance ministers, that decision was made. I might say that in my letter on December 9 to the Prime Minister, I laid out what I thought were several suggestions for agenda topics . I said firstly that we ought to discuss a national industrial and economic strategy aimed at diversifying all regions, including adjustment measures for all region s, not just Quebec.

I said that fiscal and economic co-o rdination, including mo netary policy, deficits and fiscal arrangements such as equalization and EPF ought to be an agenda topic for this First Ministers' meeting. I said that joint budget guidelines or targets might be another matter that we ought to discuss. I said agriculture, including the GATT round, which is coming very close, as we understand it, to a very critical point, ought to be discussed. I had said that other trade issues, including interprovincial trade barr ier re duction agre eme nts and indeed the involvement of the provinces-- Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Point of Order Mr. Steve Ashton {Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, we certainly have no objection to the minister outlining what economic plans, if any, this government has, but we are limited in Question Period time. I would suggest perhaps the First Minister could table the letter, as is according to our rules, and perhaps might consider having a ministerial statement on the position of the government, at which time, we could have a more detailed analysis here in Question Period. Mr.

Speaker: On the point of order raised, I would like to rem ind the honourable minister that answers to questions should be as brief as possible. * (1 355) Education and Training Initiative Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs {Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr . Sp eak er , with a final supplementary question. What we are looking for are new, innovative ideas. We have not heard any yet.

Will the First Minister tell us if he will be supporting the position taken by the Premier of New Brunswick that there must be a national education and training initiative, or will he be supporting his federal Tory cousins who are suggesting this should be a decentralized initiative and totally offloaded to the provinces? Hon. Gary Fllmon {Premier): As a matter of fact, Mr.

Speaker, I did say on Friday evening, in my Jour nal interview, that I agreed with the Premier of New Brunswick that indeed that was an area in which we ought to be wor king together in a co-o rdinated fashion. ! said that our human resource capital was a very important part of our national and international competitiveness, and one that we ought to work on in a co-o rdinated fashion.

I have also talked openly about the need for the federal government to take the greater responsibility in the area of education and that I disagree with provinces such as Quebec that we ought to just simply decentralize all of these various powers and authorities to Ottawa, that this was one area in which

291 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 Ottawa ought to have a greater role in the policy with respectto education and national training initiatives. Depo-Provera Licence Approval Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels {St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, there is grave concern in our community that approval of Depo-Provera as an injectable contraceptive is back on the federal agenda and that approval of this contraceptive is imminent.

In fact, in just a few short moments, the Canadian Coalition of Depo-Provera will be holding a press conference here in Winnipeg because of this information and because of the clear links between this drug and high instance of osteoporosis and breast cancer. I would like to ask the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), what information does he have regarding federal government intentions to give in to Upjohn's aggressive campaign and to have Depo-Provera appro ved as an in jec table long-lasting contraceptive. Hon. Donald Orchard {Minister of Health): Mr.

Speaker, the issue of Depo-Provera is one that concerns us a great deal, and we have attempted to seek information from the federal government as to whether some of the rumours which my honourable friend refers to are in fact accurate, as to whether there are recent requests, once again, to have the drug licensed, parti cularly for contraceptive purposes. Mr. Speaker, we have been unable to confirm the accuracy or inaccuracy of that rumour. We do share concerns with those who are opposed to the licensing of Depo-Provera for purposes that are being currently under investigation in other nations.

We simply have made the case with the federal government that we do not believe there should be any lic ensin g fo r any pu rposes for which Depo-Provera may be used until there is sufficient and very excellent research documentation to assure its safety to women who may use the pharmaceutical. Ms. Wasylycla-Lels: That information is certainly appreciated.

I am wondering if the Minister of Health, given the uncertainty about whether or not Depo-Provera will be approved, would today write or call his federal count erpart and reques t onc e again that Depo-Provera not be approved at this time as an injectable contraceptive. Mr. Orchard: I think it is fair to say that we have already done that, because we heard the same rumours some time ago that there was yet another attempt at licensing. In our discussions and departmental disc ussi ons with the federal government, as I said in my first answer, we are unable to confirm the accuracy or the inaccuracy of that rum our.

Mr. Speaker, we have made the position and taken the position consistently with the federal government and the licensing agency that no such licence should be granted until adequate assurance of safety of the product is met. That position has been communicated to the federal government in the very recent past. * (1 400) Breast Cancer Government Initiatives Ms. Judy Wasylycla-Lels {St. Johns): I am wondering what steps are being undertaken by this minister and this government to reduce the very high incidence of death among women attributable to breast cancer.

By the minister's own statistics, for the most recent year, there were 15 7 deaths and 655 diagnosed cases of breast cancer. What steps are being taken while this government awaits for the na tional study on the breast screen ing mammogram? Hon. Donald Orchard {Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, a number of initiatives, not the least of which is a working group of experts from the province of Manitoba to provide guidance and counsel to the ministry in terms of a breast cancer screening mammography program.

It will be probably in January that I will release to my honourable friend the recommendations of that working group. We have the same level of concern that has been expressed in recent articles about the incidence of and the seriousness of breast cancer as a killing disease entity of women. We are committed in the province to do whatever we can within the resources available and within the appropriate technologies available to assure the best possible protection against the incidence of breast cancer in women.

That can take a number of events, a number of issues that I no doubt will share with you at a future date.

December 16 , 19 91 LEG ISL ATIVE ASS EMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 292 Workers Compensation Long-term Benefits Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, I have a brief quote: A number of long-term claims have been identified, and it is unknown whether the claimants have been given an adequate opportunity to become independent of the compensation system, in other words, to force these injured workers off benefits to which they are entitled. The quote comes from Board Talk.

Can the minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board explain the reasons why there has been a marked increase in the numbers of long-term inju red workers who have received termination of benefits letters, when it is clear that they are unfit to return to active duties? Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): I can tell the House that, as part of their review of long-term cases, the board undertakes on a regular basis to review whether people are able to return to the work force.

I am aware of a number of cases, as the member for Transcona is, where that is questionable, in which case, we ask those people to use the appeal process to determine whether or not that in fact is the case. Mr. Reid: Can the minister explain why the benefits are being terminated for these individuals on long-term disability, why they should have to appeal the process instead of having them go through the process of havi ng advice from the medical practitioners in the province to ascertain whether or not they are able to return to active employment? Mr. Praznlk: Mr.

Speaker, it is my understanding that, in those cases where benefits are terminated, they are done on the basis of some assessment that the person is able to go back to work. I say this to the member for Transcona, the concern that he raised is certainly a valid one and certainly one that I share with him. I give him the assurance, as minister, that I raised this with the board. I want to ensure that process is one that is done fairly and, if there are cases where it is not done fairly, that certainly they are brought to my attention and we will raise them with the board. Medical Advice Mr.

Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary to the same minister: Can the minister explain why some doctors on the payroll of the WCB are overruling the advice given to injured workers by the many renowned medical specialists we are fortunate to have in this province? Hon. Darren Praznlk (Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr. Speaker, I share the concerns of the member for Transcona.

One of the matters in terms of internal use of doctors at the board that I have raised with administration is to ensure that doctors there are in fact producing medical information that is current with specialists in the profession. If that is not the case, if there are from time to time doctors wh o are makin g statements that are resulting in appeals that are being won by the claimants, then those practitioners' statuses with the board will have to be looked at. Court of Queen's Bench Appeal Screening Court Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

The minister has consistently-and as early on in his tenure as Minister of Justice, the firsttime he has spoken publicly-been committed to putting a very high priority on access to justice. To that end, he has put forward, and we have supported on occasion, amendments to the small claims practices act in this province, a very important system of adjudication for claims under $5,000. Mr.

Speaker, now, however, we have learned that starting April10, 1992, it is the intention of the Court of Queen's Bench to operate a screening court for appeals from Small Claims, weeding out those that they determine are not worthy of having a second look. Mr. Speaker, can the minister indicate to the House why this quite drastic curtailment of appeal rights for small claims litigants is necessary and how it accords with his stated intention to increase access to the courts? Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr.

Speaker, we have made improvements to the handling of small claims cases in the province of Manitoba. The screening that has worked very well in regard to the backlog reduction program in criminal courts has been also looked at by representatives of the Court of Queen's Bench. These matters that are to go forward, go forward

293 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 after discussion amongst the judiciary and the department. We in Manitoba are the only province to have the judiciary involved in the administration of the justice system in the way that we do here in Manitoba through our courts administration board. That kind of a decision would flow from that kind of judicial inp ut. The judiciary has quite a role, as the hon ourable member would know, in the admin istration of jus tice in Manitoba. If the hono u rable member thi nks tha t some how somebody's rights are going to be infringed, I would like to know how.

If he has any examples that he would like to bring to my attention, I would be pleased to deal with them. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question to the minister is: Does the minister support this new, untested restriction of appeal rights which heretofore in this province has not been a part of our system? Does he support that restriction which was not put forward as a potential consequence of the last amendment act we put forward and which will result in litigants with claims under $5,000 never having their claim heard by a legally trained judge? Mr.

McCrae: We have been operating small claims without using legally trained judges for some time. The honourable member, if he is against handling cases in our Small Claims Court or in any of our court systems, if he is against a fairness and an efficiency that goes with certain changes, then he should say so. If the honourable member is against reform of our judicial institutions, then let him say so. I say that there are problems in the justice system that require correction. There are some people in the legal community who would want to stand in the way of improvements in our justice system.

I have seen it before, and I hope I am not seeing it again from the honourable member for St. James. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, if indeed a small claims hearing is going to now be a matter- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Question, please. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, the minister has talked about justice for the masses. Let us see him do it. Will he at least commit today to moving toward legally trained judges in this province, seeing as we are one of the only provinces left in the country in which you cannot get before a legally trained judge? Why are litigants for under $5,000 not worthy of that kind of treatment? Mr.

McCrae: If the honourable member has a complaint that someone has brought to his attention, I would be very happy to look at it, Mr. Speaker. I have not received any complaints about the system that we have. If the honourable member wants to bring to my attention any specific complaints from individual Manitobans, that is what I am here for. We try to deal with those things very expeditiously as well. I am disturbed by the attitude that I see in the honourable member of standing in the way of change because, you see, the way improvements happen is through change. Point of Order Mr. Edwards: Mr.

Speaker, I am disturbed by the superfluous comments of the Minister of Justice attacking my motives in asking that question, when after three attempts, he still has not- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. • (141 0) Domtar Site Cleanup Ms. Marianne Cerllll (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, this government's involvement in the Domtar hazardous waste contamination in Radisson reeks of political interference and negligence.

I am going to table and read from a memo from the regional supervisor for dangerous goods when he said that he would have a difficult time justifying the situation in a public for um. I find it inc omprehensible tha t the gove rnment can allow the public to be inconvenienced and threatened, all the while letting Domtar stall with the cleanup. My question is for the Minister of Environment. What was the basis in allowing the delays in the clean-up proposal or the cleanup of this site when we know that there have been donations from Domtar to both political parties, and we know of the Premier's errors? Hon.

Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I find it quite surprising that the member is now only catching up on what the Free Press was talking about a number of weeks ago. It is obvious that we have had some considerable concern about the process that Domtar has been involved in, but I think there is one thing that the

December 16, 199 1 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 294 community needs to be made perfectly aware of, that the technology has evolved so that we can today do a much better cleanup than was proposed under the previous administration. The agreement that they struck was to cap it and walk away. Ms. Cerllll: Mr.

Speaker, any time anyone wants some information from his department- was it merely another public relations exercise to issue the work orders , there were six work orders , to be done by December 15 , or has there been any action with regard especially to the removal of the containers on the site and the- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, it has long been our concern as to the willingness of the corporation to live up to direct orders . They have accepted the orders as they were written, and it is our expectation that they will be completed.

If they are not, we will take appropriate action to make sure that they are. Ms. Cerllll: Mr. Speaker, it is past the deadline. What is it going to take for this minister to begin to enforce the environmental legislations that are in place? They have talked about getting tough- Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, the Domtar site was left in limbo for 10 years, primarily under the admin istration and in the co nstituency of the previous ministry of Environm ent. They neglected to get on with the cleanup.

The reason that there has been some activity on the last three sites was started by the member for Portage Ia Prairie (Mr. Connery), so we can get on with a proper and complete cleanup. School of Psychiatric Nursing Reopening Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, in the April budget, the Minister of Health closed the Selkirk School of Psychiatric Nursing. The closure took millions of dollars out of the Selkirk economy and put the education of mental health care workers in this province in complete disarray.

The nine months that have passed since the closure of the school have given the minister the opportunity to reflect upon his bad decision. I would ask the minister now to rescind the closure of the school. Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I believe this issue was dealt with in quite a lot of detail during the last session. I note with interest though that my honourable friend did not take the time during He alth Estimates to come in and pose questions about the school at Selkirk closing.

I know he did not do tha t because he would have a tough time getting the issue by the member for Brandon East (Mr. Evans) whose constituency in the city of Brandon is benefitting greatly from the consolida tion and improvement of the School of Psychiatric Nursing in Brandon . Selkirk Mental Health Centre Forensic Unit Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm the information that I received that the forensic unit being negotiated for the Selkirk Mental Health Centre is not going to be built ? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): No, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Dewar: Can this minister provide the House and the people of Selkirk the reason why it is not going to be there? Mr. Orchard: No, Mr. Speaker. Snow Lake, Manitoba Labour Adjustment Committee Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for Energy and Mines. The community of Snow Lake is reeling under the closure of a couple of mines , one in July and another one for Fe bruary, the loss of some 11 0 jobs out of employment of some 330 at HBM&S.

My question to the minister is: Has the minister, through the Labour Adjustment Committee, finally agreed to support the relocation monies that should be available to the people who left Snow Lake for jobs in Flin Flon and Leaf Rapids ? Hon. Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): Mr. Sp eaker, of course, I am no t responsible for the Labour Adjustment Committee, but I understand that anyone who has been relocated or is about to be relocated will benefit from the Labour Adjustment Committee and the monies it has available for the benefit of those employees. Mr. Storie: Mr.

Speaker, the Province of Manitoba has not contributed its share.

295 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 Mineral Exploration Mr. Jerry Storie (FIIn Flon): My question to the minister is: Will the minister respond to requests from the LGD of Lynn Lake and the town of Snow Lake and com mit , through Manitoba Mineral Resources, to double the exploration budget of MMR so th at we can be assured th at th e communities of Snow Lake and Leaf Rapids are going to continue to exist beyond 19 93-94? Hon.

Harold Neufeld (Minister of Energy and Mines): Manitoba Mineral Resources have been directed and have indeed been carrying out, by themselves and also leaving other monies from private industry, to explore in the Snow Lake area. I should remind, and I am sure that the member for Flin Flon well knows that, in 20 years starting from about 19 70, millions of dollars have been spent and no new mines were found. The finding of mines is a difficult procedure, but we are making every effort and spending all monies we can spare to locate new deposits in that area.

The seven mines that were found in the Snow Lake area were found some years ago, and in spite of having spent many millions of dollars in that area, we have not found a new deposit in the last 20 years . Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, the money is available through the Manitoba Mineral Resources. Can the minister explain to the city councillors in Snow Lake why their community is going to be allowed to shrivel and die while this minister sits on assets of MMR of some $20 million? Mr. Neufeld: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Manitoba Mineral Resources have been spending money in that area.

The Manitoba Mineral Resources have been leaving money from the industry to spend mone y in that area. The professionals who are in the area know where to look and know where they might find, but the ability to find is one that is- we cannot direct the prospectors to a specific area. We can tell them to try to locate some deposits in an area, but to find it is like looking for a needle in a haystack. GATT Negotiations Marketing Boards Mrs. Sharon Carstalrs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.

Speaker, atthe recent concerned farm ers ' protest in Ottawa, a protest that this gover n ment had to be dragged kicking and screaming to attend, there was a GATT briefing. In that GATT briefing, it was very clear to those farmers in attendance that the marketing boards were very much on the table of the GATT negotiations and that only Ja pan, Korea and Canada were the least interested in defen ding them .

Can the Minister of Agriculture tell this House what recent discussions he has had with the appropria te federal ministers as to what will Canada's position be if it is a take-it -or-leave- it situation with respect to the marketing boards? * (14 20) Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I can tell the member that I have spoken with the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Grains and Oilseeds, both who have been in Europe to discuss this issue.

Our position that we put forward well over a year ago was that, first and foremost, we want the removal of export subsidies and, secondly, that strengthening the clarification of

Article XI is still our official position. There is no other position on the table at this time. Mrs. Carstalrs: The sense of this meeting was clearly that they were going to be sacrificed. Has the minister had no discussions at all as to what will be the final and ultimate position of our governmentwhen they are given a take-it -or -leave-it contract? Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, the member is creating a ver y hy pot het ical situation . Ther e is no take-it -or-leave-it position on the table at this time.

We are at the table negotiating at this very moment and continue to be there with our position intact from a year ago. Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired. Nonpolitical Statements Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Mr. Speaker, I seek the leave of the House in order to make a nonpolitical statement. Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Broadway have leave to make a no npolitical statement? Some Honourable Members: Leave. Mr. Speaker: Leave. It is agreed. Mr. Santos: Mr.

Speaker, I rise to congratulate the well-known Winnipeg lawyer David Matas upon being elected president of the Canadian Council for Refugees . The Canadian Council for Refugees is an umbrella body made up of more than 10 0 groups across the country.

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 296 Since 19 77, this council has done an excellent job in promoting human rights and fair treatment for refugees and immigrants alike. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: I would like to draw the attention of honourable members to the loge to my left, where we have with us this afternoon Mr. Herold Driedger, the former member fo r Niakwa. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. Committee Changes Mr. Nell Gaudry (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Inkster (Mr.

Lamoureux), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts be amended as follows: Crescentwood (Mr. Carr) for St. James (Mr. Edwards). Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Agreed. Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimll): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Account s be amended as follows: the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render) for the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), and the member for Emer son (Mr. Penner) for the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau). I move, seconded by the member for Fort Garry (Mrs.

Vodrey), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs be amended as follows: the member for Fort Garry (Mrs. Vodrey) for the member for Rossmere (Mr. Neufeld), and the member for Assiniboia (Mrs. Mcintosh) for the member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Stefanson). Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Agreed. House Business Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, before you call the motion to move in to discuss the throne speech, I wonder if you would canvass the House-l understand there have been previous dis cussions -t hat we unanimously consent to agree to debate Bill 35, second reading.

I understand the bill has been distributed. I wonder if you might call for agreement from the House to do that. Furthermore, if that is granted by the House, and subsequent to that, if Bill 35 is passed on second rea d ing- th is is all hypothetical-! would announce then that the Standing Committee on Municipal Affairs would tonight meet at 8 p.m. in Room 255, by leave of the House, Mr. Speaker. It would sit until the members of the committee determined when it should rise and, if necessary, that committee also would begin sitting tomorrow morning, at 10 a.m., in that same room to consider Bill 35. Mr.

Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I want to indicate what the Finance minister is indicating is highly unusual in the House, but these are highly unusual circumstances. We recognize the urgency of passing the bill through. I would hope that there would not be any precedent seen in this. It is exceptional circumstances. We are agreed to provide leave in all stages of the bill, subject to the qualification there be proper hearings. I am pleased the minister has a contingency for possible hearings tomorrow morning as well, if necessary.

Subject to that condition, we are more than willing to provide unanimous consent from our caucus at any stage of this bill. Mr. Kevin Lam oureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Just to add to the comments from the Leader of the official opposition, I am also led to believe that we will not enter into clause by clause of Bill35 this evening, that will in fact be reserved till tomorrow's meeting. Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to set aside the regularly scheduled business of the day which is the Throne Speech Debate for the seventh day of debate? Is there leave of the House to set this aside?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: There is leave. Is there leave of the House, now, to deal with Bill 35 for second reading? Is there leave? Some Honourable Members: There is leave. Mr. Speaker: There is leave. ORDERS OF THE DAY SECOND READINGS Bill 35- The City of Winnipeg Amendment Act

(2) Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, that Bill 35, The City of Winnipeg Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2

297 LEGISLATIVE ASS EMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg, be now read a second time and referred to a committee of this House. Motion presented. Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much, and I thank the members opposite for their indulgence in dealing with a relatively critical matter for the City of Winnipeg. As members of the House know, the Court of Appeal struck down the tax roll for business tax for 1991 for the City of Winnipeg. That action caused about a $44-million shortfall in the City of Winnipeg revenues learned of during the last three weeks of the fiscal year for the city.

The loss of $44 million having now already been spent would cause a significant hardship upon the taxpayers of the city of Winnipeg; firstly, because of the fact the city cannot legally run a deficit. It would have to levy in 1 992 for the losses of 1991. That levy, Mr. Speaker, would require a significant change in how the city collected its business tax, going to a flat rate immediately. They would have to go to the maximum flat rate, 15 percent, in order to at least achieve as much as possible, the goal of raising the 1991 business tax levy and the 1992 business tax levy.

Even doing that, they would have a $26.5-million shortfall over and above the maximum amount to be levied under the business tax which would then cause $26.5 million to be levied upon the property taxpayer of the city of Winnipeg. So, Mr. Speaker, the importance of this bill to regularize the 1991 business tax roll for the City of Winnipeg is extremely important from the taxpayers' perspective. Mr.

Speaker, if I can take a moment-and again I appreciate the indulgence of members opposite having received the bill only a few moments ago-the principle of the bill, the reason that the bill is being introduced is indicated on page 1 , under the title "Purpose," and that purpose of this act is to authorize retroactively the business tax assessment levy and collection of business tax by the City of Winnipeg for the 1991 taxation year and further to provide with a method of business assessment levy and collection of business tax until the 1993 taxation year or until a bylaw is passed under subsection 182 of The City of Winnipeg Act. *

(1430) Mr. Speaker, basically what is happening with this bill is that we seek to validate the 1991 business assessment tax roll for the City of Winnipeg and the collection of taxes thereon; No.2, to fix in place the methodology unchallenged related to the 1992 business tax roll, and that on January 1 , 1993, the City of Winnipeg would require the current legislation related to business tax on a flat rate basis be implemented. Failing that, the City of Winnipeg has indicated they are going to have a task force of business people and city officials to try and seek better ar rangements.

What those better arrangements are, we do not know at this time. They are, in fact, seeking a better way of achieving the city's revenue goals but at the same time dealing more fairly with businesses in general. I wish them luck in that regard, because it is a very, very difficult thing to do and no one, of course, likes to pay taxes. Nonetheless, I wish them well, and I would hope that they would continue on in that vein and do seek an appropriate arrangement. By implementing this bill, it will give them an opportunity at least to have some time to discuss that.

Were we only to validate the 1991 roll to save the $44 million from last year, they would not have time between now and March when they have to implement their budget to be able to address those very important issues with the community that is most affected, the business community. As a result we have introduced this bill. I also apologize for the length of the bill. The sum and substance of the actual bill itself appears on pages 1 and 2 and again at the end on pages 30 through 32. What is in the middle, Mr. Speaker, is referred to as

Schedule D.

Schedule D relates to all of those historical passages of legislation that have to do with business tax that have been accumulated to be placed within the bill. Because of requirements deemed wise by our Legislative Counsel, they should be included within the act. The sum and substance of the effects of the bill are related on pages 1 and 2 and following one clause on page 3 and then the latter three pages of the bill as well. That gives us basically the outline of the bill. Mr.

Speaker, by introducing this bill the City of Winnipeg should take notice that by no means does the Legislature of Manitoba or the government condone the substantial increases in taxation that were levied upon the business community this year. Increases of 200 percent and 300 percent are not acceptable in anybody's book. The City of Winnipeg should not construe our actions in considering this bill as carte blanche to continue on with the kind of

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 298 situation that has gone on in the past. That, in the minds of taxpayers that I have heard from, is not on. I am talking about the business taxpayer, the property taxpayer, the homeowner, the renter, virtually ever1one in this province is fed up to here with taxes. They do not want any more taxes. Our government has recognized that and for the last four budgets have not increased taxes, in fact, in one case decreased them. Notwithstanding, we all have to look at the cost containment side. We cannot continue to levy more and more taxes.

The public cannot and will not tolerate it. I pass caution to the City of Winnipeg with the introduction of this bill. They should not consider this as any kind of endorsement of the actions that they have taken over the past year. The business community is outraged at the 200 percent and 300 percent increases in taxes that many of them have endured. I cannot honestly blame them, but at the same time I think we have to recognize that to leave the City of Winnipeg in a $44-million shortfall position and to have that levied in 19 92 is more unfair, Mr.

Speaker, more unfair for all taxpayers, the business community, the homeowner, the renter and everyone else, because the impact of that all in one year would be devastating. So, Mr. Speaker, I commend the bill to the House and seek the support of all members to have this matter read a second time. Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): I would like to thank the minister, first of all, for the briefing that he gave us on this at the end of last week, and I realize the difficulties that he has had in putting together a bill like this in a very short period of time. The purpose of this bill, Mr.

Speaker, is to clarify the intent of provincial legislation, 198 8, which was to enable the city, during a transition period of unspecified time, to use a variable taxation rate for the city business tax. The opposition agreed to the introduction of this bill now for two reasons. First of all, the court judgment, in our view, meant-and here we agree with the minist er-t hat the $44-million 1991 tax levy would have had to been returned to businesses in the city of Winnipeg.

I believe, as the minister does, that this would have created a chaotic situation, and it would indeed have Jed to economic hardship and difficulties for those who depend on city payroll and for those who depend on city services. Secondly, the 1 988 legislation had offer ed the city the opportunity to soften the impact on small businesses by enabling the city, for an unspecified period of time, the transition period, to soften the flat rate tax that the new Conservative government wanted and enable them to introduce over the transition period a variable rate.

We approve and we would have supported that approach of the city, Mr. Speaker. We know that the City of Winnipeg and other municipalities face an increasing offloading of costs by the province. lt also must deal with the increasing welfare rolls that have been created by the economic policies of Tory governments here and in Ottawa. We all know that cities and municipalities across Canada have far fewer ranges of taxes to call upon than do other levels of governm ent.

The City of Winnipeg perhaps is fortunate in that it does have the opportunity to raise from both large and small businesses, and like other municipalities, Winnipeg, of course, relies for its growth, indeed its survival, on small business. I do not think anyone in this House is in any doubt about the difficulties and the suffe ring of small businesses today, particularly in the retail trade. The evidence is there in the empty stores and in the unemployment and the bankruptcy statistics, particularly in the city of Winnipeg. Mr.

Speaker, these small businesses are failing in part because of the general Canadian recession, but they have also been badly affected by the GST. Jane Jacobs, an urban specialist, predicted this. She predicted its impact when she argued that, and I quote, no neater little tax contrivance could be imagined than the GST for favouring large relatively self-sufficient enterprises, such as multinational corporations and their many subsidiaries and many internal transactions. The GST, she warned, would "needlessly twist the knife in the very vitals of the city economies." Mr.

Speaker, I think that is what we are seeing today in Winnipeg and in many other municipalities across the country, that the GST has had a tre mendously adverse effect upon small businesses. Small businesses, I would remind the House, are the major growth sector of the economy, and that 60 percent of our new jobs in fact are created in that sector. The City of Winnipeg, I think, chose a wise path in trying to use the variable tax rate to ease the tax burden on these businesses, primarily with the purpose of retaining the jobs in this

299 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 sector and signalling to the small businesses of Winnipeg its encouragement of the job creation potential that they offered to all of us. It was a sensible and appropriate strategy, Mr. Speaker, and one would have expected the government to have supported this. As the province reduces its support for the city, the city must find alternate sources for revenue, for welfare and for the expensive infrastructure of suburban expansion, the legacy of the former city councillors who now sit across the House.

The minister has said that he has heard of outrageous increases of 200 percent. I think again he must only look to the policies of those former city councillors who now sit with him in the cabinet. *

(1440) The city chose to reverse the policies of those former councillors who had permitted the business tax portion of the city budget to decline from its 1972 level of 1 0.6 percent of total revenue to approximately 5.9 percent of the 1990 revenues, this indeed during the period, at least some part of it, of economic growth for the city.

H the business sector had continued to contribute 10.6 percent of the city budget as it did in 1972, Winnipeg would have received $24.6 million last year, a great deal more in revenue which might have gone some way to meeting the growing , unavoidable costs that are associate d with economic decline and recession and to deal with the declining portion of provincial transfers. So we support the principle of variable taxation rate in the transition period. We feel it is certainly a much fairer way of raising taxes in difficult times.

The minister has indicated, today and on other occasions, that he is prepared to look at other proposals from the city for a business tax system that would be acceptable to all types of businesses. The city has created a task force to deal with this which will present its findings to the minister. I expect they will look at a number of alternatives to the flat tax system. Edmonton, for example, has had a reasonably acceptable system of five categories of taxation for some time now. Ontario uses a variable tax rate based on square footage. Beyond a certain square footage, the tax rate changes.

So there are a number of alternatives which I think we could look at. I hope the minister will indeed remain open to new ideas and proposals which come from the city task force and from the small businesses of the Winnipeg community. I particularly hope the minister will use the time that we now have to carefully examine the economic impact on Winnipeg's small businesses of the imposition of a flat tax rate, something which as far as I can tell the government has so far failed to do. Mr. Speaker, with those hopes and expectations, we would like to see the bill now proceed to the committee stage.

I look forward to hearing the views and presentations of the citizens of Winnipeg on this bill. Introduction of Guests Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the honourable member for St. James, I would like to draw the attention of honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery, where we have with us this after noon, Mr. Harry Harapiak, the former member for The Pas, and Mr. Leonard Harapiak, the former member for Swan River, who are accompanying their elderly aunt who is visiting from the Ukraine. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here this afternoon. Committee Changes Mr.

Nell Gaudry (SL BonHace): I move, seconded by the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), that the composition of the St anding Committee on Municipal Affairs be amended as follows: the member for St. James (Mr. Edwards) for the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Carr). Mr. Speaker: Agreed? Agreed. *** Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on Bi11 35 presently before the House in the unusual fashion that has been spoken of earlier by the government House leader (Mr. Manness), as well as by the Minister for Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst). We , too, recognize that these are extreme circumstances.

This is an unusual circumstance, it results from the unpredictability of the court action, and the ultimate result which, of course, put the City of Winnipeg in a very, very difficult position. We also recognized that the City of Winnipeg's inte rpretation of the amendmen t act , the amendments which were brought in in 1989, appears to have been supported, perhaps not in the

December 16 , 19 91 LEG ISLA TIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 300 legislation, but by indication from the provincial departmsnt in its

interpretation; that is, the City of Winnipeg took the view that they had essentially a free hand with respect to whether or not to move to a uniform rate and how they would do that. They then moved from that position to in fact take really the best of both worlds. They reasses sed-the first time in 17 years-they got greatly increased rates and they then took those new assessments and applied it to the old variable rates. Now, my reading of the legislation which was passed in this House in 19 89, and of course I was not the critic at the time, but I have read it in some detail leading up to ttis debate.

My reading of it is that it is very clear that we are moving to a uniform rate with the City of Winnipeg. That is the clear indication of that legislation. It provides for a transitional period during which the city will have the opportunity to alleviate increases, undue increases, for any period of time. There is no limit on how long the transitional provisions can be in place, but what is clear from that legislation is that we are going to end up with a uniform rate, and that is in fact what we have in the rest of the province, and that it seems to me was the decision made in that legislation.

Now, the City of Winnipeg did not see it that way. They took advice to that effect, and they ended up in the Court of Queen's Bench where Mr. Justice Harshfield decided in their favour and agreed that they did have a free hand and, in fact, to coin a term, could have their cake and eat it too. (Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Acting Speaker, in the Chair) They got to the Court of Appeal, and the Court of Appeal said, no. The Court of Appeal said the act is clear, they are moving towards a uniform rate. If they start they must finish the job.

You cannot just take one part and one of the other, meld the two, and come up with what you want, the legislation says we are going to a uniform rate. If you assess and come up with new assessments, you have got to go the second mile and bring in a uniform rate. Mr. Acting Speaker, if indeed they did want to go to a uniform rate, they could and should have done that. They could and should have used the transitional provisions to alleviate any, as I say, undue increase in taxes in the short term, perhaps even the long term. Mr.

Acting Speaker, they have now come to us, they have come to the minister and they have said, no, we want some more time to consider whether or not we are moving to a uniform rate. It strikes me that the cow is out of the barn, but indeed that is what they want to do, and they are in a bit of a jam because they have $44 million which is not legally collectible, even though they have already collected it, and they may have to pay it back. So they are in a bit of a bind. Mr. Acting Speaker, I must say I am a little uneasy ratifying tax rolls for the City of Winnipeg.

I have assessed those feelings because I want to respect their jurisdiction and I want to curtail my desire, perhaps, to be doing whatthey are doing at City Hall, making those decision s . We ar e provincial politicians and we must recognize that they have a job to do. Their job is levying business and property taxes and we do not want to unduly interfer e regardless of what we feel about how they are actually doing their jobs. I make no defence for the City of Winnipeg's decisions on this, nor do I make a defence or purport to for how they spend their money-the $44 million they are going to collect.

Whether or not I agree with how they do it or do not agree with it is not the issue. When I came to that conclusion, it was relatively a simple move to realize that they had a certain belief about this legislation. They were assured by some officials in the department that, yes, this was the intention and the Court of Appeal thought otherwise. Essentially, what we are doing here is we are going back and we are doing it the way that the city and the province thought they were doing it at the outset, and so that is a move that we can support at this time.

I am concerned and I look forward to comments tonight from some of the presenters and, perhaps, tomorrow morning about whether or not we need to do this for 19 92. I note we are not only ratifying this year, we are ratifying next year's, and I understand the reason behind that is the city has embarked upon a committee. They are going to be looking to the business community for some further advice on whether to stick with the variable rate or move to a uniform rate or some combination therein.

As I say, it has always struck me that that decision had been made, but the city believes they want to take some further time to consider it. In any event, I am sure there will be comments from presenters tonight on that issue.

301 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 Mr. Acting Speaker, the city has assured me and the minister has assured me that the successful litigants in this case will not be out of pocket. I think that is important. I do not say that we should forfeit our jurisdiction to not remedy this situation, I do not say that.

We have a job to do and we are going to do that and let the City of Winnipeg do its work, but had we not got an agreement that the litigants, in this case the successful litigants, would not be out of pocket, the message that would have been sent would have been detrimental, in my view, to good order and justice in this province and that is, do not bother taking on City Hall, because even if you win, the province will just fix it up and you will lose.

Not only will you not get the damage awards or your taxes back, but you will not even recuperate your legal costs. • (1 450) That is the wr ong message because in a democracy we want people to challenge us as legislators. We want people to challen�e. City Hall and determine whether or not we are w1th1n the law or not. That is the way it works. We want these litigants, even though we are taking away their win, in substance, not to be out of pocket. That is only fair. Mr.

Acting Speaker, I am pleased to indicate that I have discussed this with the minister, I have discussed it with the mayor and received ass urances on both fronts that the taxed solicitor-and-client costs of the litigants in this case will be paid by the city. Believe me, I realize that some of the counsel are expensive, but after tax I can tell you it is not going to be anything near the amount that they stand to lose as a result of the decision. -(interjection)-Well, the minister asked if the NDP supports that, I am not sure. It may have something to do with the counsel they use, and given that, I doubt it.

In any event, the commitmen t has been given and I think it is a wise one and it is only fair. Mr. Acting Speaker, I do want to raise the flag on some other issues in the proposed legislation, albeit we have only had a very few minutes to look at this final version. 1 want to thank the minister for his openness in this process and for giving us a briefing on Friday af ternoon on the draft bill-and that is my colleague the member for Wolseley (Mrs. Friesen) and me. So 1 have had a chance to look at and understand the gist of this proposed legislation.

I see that there have been some amendme nts flowing from the discussions we had Friday afternoon, and I welcome those. 1 do note that the regulation provisions still are very broad, and there will be some questions on that front. In particular, I flag for the minister (

d) which indicates that within the purposes, there still is the opportunity for the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council to make any regulations he considers necessary or advisable. I think that is pretty broad, especially given that, unusually, this is retroactive legislation. Now, retroactive legislation, the presumption is legislation goes from the day it is passed forwa �d; retroactive legislation is a very unusual and qUite drastic measure. It is not often that legislators bring in a law and say, by the way it is applied in the past as well as applying in the future. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) Mr.

Speaker, that is an extreme power that we are granting, rea lly, to the Lieutena nt-Governor in-Council in this case, to rectify the situation. We are going back to January 1, 1991 , and essentially saying to all of the people who have lived under a set of rules, we are fixing it up not only for next year but we are retroactively fixing it for this year, and we are also reserving the right to make any further changes back to January 1, 1991.

I recognize there are some limitations on that regulation-making power, but I simply draw to the minister's attention that 1 will have some questions flowing from that in the course of this. Mr. Speaker, again let me reiterate that I believe, regardless of what one thinks about the Court of Appeal decision, they are the highest court in th� land. I certainly, having read it, agree that the1r

interpretation was the reasonable one. I, having looked at the legislation not knowing some of the prior discussions, have to say that it was pretty clear to me from that legislation that we are moving to a uniform rate. 1 do look forward to the city reporting early on next year, hopefully, on what they want, because I think it is time they told us what they wanted and were clear and then stood to it. If they want a uniform rate, they will need no further amendments, because they will have to move to it in 1993. That is all we are doing. We are only changing for this year and for next year.

If they do not want a uniform rate and they want to go back to the variable rate, I think we are all prepared to listen to their arguments, because we

December 16 , 199 1 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA 302 recognize the business community is split on this. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business wants to maintain a variable rate. Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce wants a uniform rate. It tends to have to do with what kind of businesses you represent. The bigger the businesses, generally, the less you want a variable rate; the more you want a flat rate. Mr. Speaker, again, I do note that in the initial legislation, we put in a transitional provision which gave all kinds of leeway to put in a variable rate, in fact, for anything under 15 percent.

We did that. The city is essentially asking to reconsider whether or not we should be moving to a uniform rate in the first place. Mr. Speaker, for the time being, I and my party are certainly willing to allow them to do that assessment and have those committee hearings, but I do not join completely with the comments of my friend from Wolseley, who indicates that she believes that what the city has done and their procedures have been- and I am trying to remember her exact words--a sensible and rational approach.

I am not convinced of that, but I do recognize that they have the jurisdictional mandate to embark upon this process, and at least for the short term we should give them the leeway to do that. I also note, of course, that the comments from the Member for Wolseley are consistent with the view that City Council is just functioning fine and dandy and everything is working just great. I do not agree; I do not think most Winnipeggers agree.

In fact, we do look forward to some changes at City Hall, but certainly in this case, with respect to their taxation rights, we recognize their right to embark upon this process and give us, one would hope, early on in the new year, a final decision. Thank you. Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is second reading of Bill 35, The City of Winnipeg Amendment Act, Loi modifiant Ia

Loi sur Ia Ville de Winnipeg. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? An Honourable Member: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. Committee Changes Mr. George Hlckes (Point Douglas): I move, seconded by the member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk), that the composition of the Standing Commi ttee on Municipal Affairs be amended as follows: Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) for Monday, December 16, 8 p.m. Mr. Speaker: Agreed? An Honourable Member: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered. *** Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Urban Affairs): On a point of House Business, Mr.

Speaker, just to make sure that everything has been done in accordance with the requirements: that the committee on Municipal Affairs will meet tonight at eight o'clock, by leave, and again tomorrow if necessary. Mr. Speaker: That is what has been indicated by the government House leader (Mr. Manness), and the committee members will pick their hours tonight. THRONE SPEECH DEBATE Mr. Speaker: The adjourned debate, seventh day of debate, on the proposed motion of the honourable member for Niakwa (Mr.

Reimer), for an address to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor in answer to his speech at the opening of this session, and the proposed motion of the honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) in an amendment thereto, standing in the name of the honourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Rose), who has 25 minutes remaining. Mr. Bob Rose (Turtle Mountain): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to resume my remarks on the Throne Speech Debate and the proposed amendment by the Leader of the first opposition (Mr. Doer).

If I may just digress first for a moment in honour of our guests in the gallery, it is quite a comment on one family's contribution to service not only the community but to the province as well. l did not have the privilege of working with the Harapiak brothers in this House, but I have had the opportunity, in the last year and three months, to work with the current member for Swan River (Ms. Wowchuk) and can say that about the only real thing I can really find wrong with her so far is that she is a bit misguided in her politics.

I hope that sometime in the future the province will take time to recognize the contribution made by this family. Perhaps that might take place at the next

303 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 provincial election when I am sure the-w e will have a new member for Swan River. I had to get that little shot in there. We were talking about the sledgehammer and chain saw approach of the opposition to our economy, the sledgehammers of high taxes and the chainsaws of unserviceable public debt. I think we had got to the point where we were commenting on a presentation by the honourable member for Osborne (Mr.

Alcock), whom we said, among other things, that he was pointing out to us as legislators, and in a larger sense, I guess, our citizens, the need to put aside occasionally ideology and thoroughly examine our advantages and disadvantages and our goals and our relationships. Interestingly, our political system, and I am sure we all support our democrat ic system, is confrontational. As individuals, most of us I think are not as hard-line as we might appear, but the inevitable contest of the next election dictates a confrontational style that if it does not prevent, it at least discourages a true exchange of ideas.

You will have concluded from the earlier part of my presentation that I am deeply and genuinely concerned with the mounting debt load in our society. I think back to the earlier part of this century when I am tol� am not that old, so I do not remem ber-but the original theory of the Social Credit in Alberta was that projects for the good of society like bridges, schools, hospitals, that kind of thing, should be financed by governments without interest charges. *

(1500) A word of caution here to anyone who should accidentally read this in Hansard sometime in the future. This is not thoroughly researched, but the notion was at least that since money is created anyway, why not have at least long- term government assets financed without service charges, service charges which will double or triple the cost of that asset. It was dismissed at the time as lunac y-f unny-money people they were called-and I suspect will be regarded now as an admission by the honourable member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Rose) that he has no understanding of the monetary system.

I freely admit to that, but I also believe as the saying goes that I am standing at the end of a very long line, and maybe it is time a few more of us understood our monetary system. Certainly, in the vast private sector so necessary for our economy, capital has a cost and must provide a return, but is that necessarily so for public sector hard assets? The biggest competitor for capital has become ourselves through government borrowing. What would it do for our economy if that large pool of capital, and it is there, had to search for a return rather than wait for the next issue of savings bonds?

Totally off the wall, perhaps, but when we have a generally affluent society steadily loading our descendants with obscene financial burdens, and when we have what should be a respected national leader like the leader of PSAC describing a desire to work in an obscene manner, then as I said earlier, it is time to examine our institutions together. On to a topic I know something about, Mr. Speaker. There has been a great deal of debate in the last 15 months since the election about our farm economy. During the campaign, there was a great deal said about the need for safety nets.

Anyone who thinks the present situation is something that occurred suddenly and only in the last couple of years has not been connected with agriculture. There has been massive federal government support through various programs for some time as well as, more laterally, provincial support. The problem with these so-called ad hoc programs was that they were a response after the fact with no predictability whatsoever and no program to smooth out the highs and the lows of farm inc ome.

Only those people with short memories and those agricultural people with the shortest of memories will have forgotten the drought relief program, for example, an administrative nightmare with some areas with no drought demanding part of the largesse and fields that yielded well receiving payments and fields across the road with no crop and no payments. The GRI P and NI SA programs were not something devised in a hurry, but programs that were developed from ideas put forth years ago. These ideas came from four basic principles. Number one, farmers generally preferred to make a living from the marketplace.

I say generally because like any segment of society there are a few who think otherwise. The second principle was a recognition by farmers, generally, that price times yield protection should be specific, like any insurance program, to individuals not to areas or crops. The third principle was generally the recognition of the need for a program to smooth out the highs and

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMB LY OF MAN ITOBA 304 lows. The fourth, recognition that individual farmers cannot compete with the treasuries of big countries. Hence was developed the three lines of defence to the threat to our agricultural economy. The first line, the marketplace. Incentives are still very much in place for individual farmers to produce for profit.

The second line is the GRIP, an insurance program, farm specific, that guarantees a level of return regardless of price or yield known well before spring planting; and NISA, an investment program that allows producers to contribute to their own personal account, with matching government contributions, building up their own fund to draw upon when needed or upon retirement. The third line of defence was a commitment by the federal government to provide further assistance should it be required. It was this third line of defence that the farm rallies were all about, not inadequacies in the GRIP or NISA programs.

We should mention, and I suppose this is in recognition of the furiously independent farmer, participation in both these programs is entirely voluntary, unlike programs .such as unemployment insurance. Mr. Speaker, I take no credit for the development of this entirely new and I think effective approach to our very important farm economy. My contribution was simply constant lobbying and encouragement during the diff icult negotiations between several governments and farm groups. I am proud to say that a year ago we had no insurance program regardless of price or yield and now we do.

We did not have an investment program to smooth out the highs and the lows and now we do. We had no promise of a third line of defence and now we do. I am proud to be part of a government of action that has moved to substantially address, on a long-term basis, these substantial problems in agriculture. It is not difficult to find critics of these programs. Indeed we hear them regularly in this Chamber. Obviously, like my new garage at home that I was referring to earlier that I built without total success, these programs are not without fault.

I would like to hear some constructive ideas from the official opposition for a change instead of trotting out that old pleasant sounding cost of production. That is the same pleasant sounding one as tax the corporations, solve all our problems. Whose production costs, I ask, will we guarantee? The beginning farmer who may have a $50 per acre interest charge before he ever picks up a grease gun or the established farmer who owns his land and has no interest charge. Will the honourable member for Dauphin (Mr.

Plohman) let me have a big combine to harvest my crop in 10 days or will I get a smaller one that will take 20 or 30 days to do the same job? Will I get to use liquid fertilizer which is more convenient but more expensive or will my cost of production only allow for the less expensive forms of fertilizer which may not be available in my own area? Will his environmental critic let me use fertilizer at all or will we solve all our global problems with mass starvation? Will the honourable member for Dauphin-how will he approach my weed control?

Will we use the costs of the general cheaper pre-emerge chemicals or wm we use the more expensive post-emerge? Can I have a new truck to haul my grain to market on a regular basis because I happen to live a little further away from my markets than some of my neighbours? Mr. Speaker, the list goes on. If cost of production is based on the smaller, and not necessarily through any fault of their own, less effi cient producer, then the more efficient will grow fat and sassy on government subsidies gobbling up the less efficient.

Jf it is based on something less than the cost of production of that small less efficient group, are we to presume that the NDP consider them unworthy of saving? The honourable Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) admitted he does not fully understand the intr ic acies of farm programs. I admire and encourage that kind of candor from politicians. Perhaps it is what encouraged me to take a flyer into the monetary system a few moments ago. I do hope though that he does not rely too heavily on his Agriculture critic to gain an understanding.

I would urge all honourable members and our citizens as well to regard with suspicion the honourable member for Dauphin's (Mr. Plohman) instant answers for producers teetering on bankruptcy. As I said earlier, the farm crisis is not new. I know from personal experience and from experience through our farm supply outlet and from the surge of business for the debt review boards during the mid-'SOs that many a good and honest producer is not there any more, not necessarily going through bankruptcy but the equally gut-wrenching shutting down of the family farm.

The actions of our provincial government at the time are hard to comment upon because there were none. Sledgehammers and chain saws can be effective too even when they are quiet.

305 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 Mr. Speaker, some honourable members in their comments on the throne speech make remarks about what is not in the throne speech.

I would also point out that there is something else that is not in the throne speech and that is the sledgehammer of high taxes and the chain saws of increased and unserviceable debt, the ones that make a lot of noise, that make the headlines, but instead we have in the throne speech the building tools, the tools that take of the builder and the tools that take time and the co-op era tion, the inspiration and the involvement of every citizen of our province. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the constituents of Turtle Mountain I wish to all honourable members and their constituents the compliments of the season.

Many of you will be making travel plans, and I hope these plans include parts of Manitoba you or your families have not seen, particularly Turtle Mountain. We do have a province to be proud of, to be part of and to enjoy. If you can come to Turtle Mountain, you can enjoy our parks and our countryside in both winter and summer, our lakes, our scenic valleys, our golf courses, our celebrations. If you get close enough to Bunclody, I will even show you my new garage. Thank you very much. *

(1510) Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I would like to take this opportunity to put my comments about the throne speech on the record. To begin with, Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome you back as Speaker. We have seen some changes in the Question Period process and you have provided us with some new restrictions. I am sure that there will be many challenges, but I am sure you will call us to order when we get beyond your rules. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to welcome the pages to their new job, and I hope they enjoy their new experience here in the Legislature.

I hope that when the decorum gets out of hand they will not be too discouraged. I would also like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, and my other colleagues here today for allowing me the opportunity to speak on this particular day, because today is a very special day for me and for friends and relatives of the Harapiak family. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words in Ukrainian, a copy of which I will provide for Hansard.

I will also say that my Ukrainian is not perfect, but I hope that those who understand the language will bear with my errors. {Ukrainian spoken) {Translation) My ancestors came to this country in 1902. My grandfather, John Harapiak, came first. He left the Ukraine because there was very little land. Land was controlled by wealth. Two other brothers, Wasyl and Harry, came and others would have come but war broke out, making it impossible. Throughout the years my parents wrote and kept contact with one relative in particular.

Two years ago my brothers, Harry and Leonard, and my father travelled to the Ukraine to meet that family member, Tata Marka Harapiak. Today she joins us in the galley with my husband and my brothers. Welcome to Canada, Tata Marka. A few weeks ago, the people of the Ukraine voted overwhelmingly for independence. We were very pleased with the vote for independence and congratulate the government for moving so quickly to recognize the Ukraine. Although I am very pleased with this vote, things are progressing very quickly and there is much uncertainty. We hope that everyone can cope with this rapid change.

We know there will be difficulties because the Ukraine is very wealthy in resources and others do not want to let it go. We all hope this can happen without bloodshed. {English) Mr. Speaker, we all know that the Ukraine and other countries that are seeking independence at this time are going to go through difficult times, but since Canada has been amongst the first to recognize this independence, I hope that we will have the fortitude and the strength to stand behind our commitment to this country.

We recognize that they have voted for independence and it is what we want for this country, but we know that they are going to face many difficulties. We know that they are going to have an impact on us as a country as well, Mr. Speaker. Just this last weekend we heard that the Canadian grain sale may be impacted on, and if that grain sale is put into difficulty, we, the farmers of Canada and Manitoba will suffer. We are told that there could be shortages of fuel, and in fact when my aunt was coming we were not sure that there was going to be enough fuel for the planes to leave.

There is word of hunger in those countries. There are many difficulties that we must stand behind them on. The difficulty of what

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASS EMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 306 will happen to nuclear arms in those countries is also a concern to all of us. (Ukrainian spoken) (Translation) To my Aunt Tata, I hope she can take back the memory of this Legislature and tell others that she has seen democracy in action. We hope their democratic system will work as ours. (English) Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me those few words. Mr. Speaker, I would like to now comment on the throne speech as it relates to my constituency and my critic area.

The Speech from the Throne was very disappointing both to me as an MLA, a critic for Rural Development and a farmer, as I feel that there was nothing new, no new initiatives to help the rural community, just a lot of rehash of old ideas. I am disappointed that the government has decided to leave everything, every effort of stimul ating the economy, in the hands of the private sector. This government has a fixation with the deficit, and is making no effort to stimulate the economy.

If you really believe in the rural economy, I believe that the government must show some leadership, and at this point we have not had it. Government must be prepared to invest. Government mu st be prepared to create jobs and give the people the opportunity to work. There is a role tor a private sector, we do not deny that at all, but government also has to have responsibility and show leadership. When I first commented on the Speech from the Throne I said that I was very disappointed, but there are a few positive things that this government has done and I would like to comm ent on those.

First of all, the Rural Development Bonds, which I was very skeptical about , I want to cong ratulate the community of Morden for the first success story. The Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) must be very pleased about that success story, and the jobs that will be in his community. I am pleased that the government has followed the Saskatchewan example and negotiated an RRSP credit into the bonds. Hopefully, this will encourage more people to invest. I still feel that there should be some guarantee of interest on these bonds to encourage more investment.

I have talked to many people in the comm unities, for as you know or may not know, we have done a round of meetings across the province, meeting with people, talking about different issues. I have to say that although people have some interest in the bonds, they are very skeptical about them as well. The real reason they are skeptical, Mr. Speaker, is there is no money or very little money in the rural commu nities right now.

If the government would take the initiative to stimulate that economy, get some jobs into the rural community, then there would be more mo ney to invest, and that is really what we need-more money, more jobs, and then people will invest, and of course, there is a spinoff effect from that. However, even with rural development bonds, the government has a responsibility to show support and leadership. I am very disappointed that the government has chosen to just about cut out the Department of Co-operative Development.

Here is an area where we could have people who could do planning, otter services to the people who are going to perhaps invest in these rural bonds. On the one hand, they want people to invest in bonds and into their own commu nity, but they have taken away the tools through the co-op development department. I feel that is a mistake on this government's part. * (1 520) Mr. Speaker, another area that I would like to commend the government on is the review of crop insurance, particularly now, at a time when there is so much more happening through crop insurance, and that is the GRIP program.

All of the details are relevant to GRIP and people have raised many, many concerns with the data in the crop insurance that is being used, and I feel that it must be reviewed. One area that is a concern is that farmers who have had losses several years, a couple of years in a row through no fault of their own, are being penalized in crop insurance and their rate goes down and that must be addressed. The one area that I have concern with crop insurance, Mr. Speaker, is the tact that crop insurance agents are now being asked to take a cut in pay.

I do not understand why this government is allowing the corporation to go ahead in this direction when they are doing a review. Would it not have made more sense to have reviewed the job of the crop adjusters and the agents at the same time as they were reviewing the whole package of crop insurance? Why is one being split out from the other? That leads us to be suspicious of the motives

307 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 behind this cut in salary and per diems for the crop adjusters. (Mrs. Louise Dacquay, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair) Madam Deputy Speaker, I recently had the honour of attending the sod-turning ceremony for the future Swan River Personal Care Home, and I want to commend the government for going forward with this project. ! served on the Swan River Hospital Board about eight years ago, and at that time, we were just starting to deal with the personal care home and plans were well underway; however, there were many difficulties within the community.

People in the commu nities could not decide where they wanted the beds. -(interjection)- If the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) would listen to what I am saying, I am trying to pay him a complime nt. He chooses to make fun of the former member for Swan River, and I would rather he did not do that while I am speaking. I served on the Swan River Hospital Board, as I said, and it was because the rural people had a dispute over where the beds should be that the beds could not go forward.

In fact, there are some very hard feelings at the present time about where the beds are, the beds at Benito and the ones in Swan River, but we as a commu nity have put those behind us, and we are very happy to see that there is going to be the additional beds in Swan River because they are very much needed. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Swan River constituency is based on forestry and agriculture. Those are our two main industries.

The constituency and the people in the constituency are suffering very badly, first of all, because of the agricultural economy-that has been mentioned many times here, the low prices of grain. There is one issue I feel I must put on the record and that is the GRIP program. We have attended a series of meetings across the province and in the Swan River area, and there is a concern with GRIP. This government must listen to the people and address those concerns. People are not happy with the formula.

They have told government time and time again that the GRIP program must be either scrapped or revamped so farmers can get the cost of production. Now I hear members across the way saying, what is the cost of production; on whose cost of production. The Department of Agriculture has many times worked out the cost of production for all commodities. There is the cost of production. People in the dairy industry have cost of production, and nobody asks them whether their cost of production is going to be based on how much they pay for a cow.

Why does it have to be based for a grain producer on how much they pay for a combine? There are figures that the government can come up with if they are committed to the cost of production. At the meeting in Swan River when we were reviewing GRIP the farmers' representative Owen McAuley was there. He was asked whether he would take the farmers' words and messages into consideration or whether he was just there for show. He said if the farmers wanted cost of production, if that was the message he was really getting then he would take that message to government. I hope the Minister of Agriculture (Mr.

Findlay) will meet with Owen McAuley and talk about these things, because that is the message people are giving him right across the province. They want cost of production. They are also prepared to look at capping, at the amount of money that goes to each farm instead of having it open-ended. Farmers are seeing that this is another way of doing things. I hope the minister will talk to Owen McAuley and take seriously what farmers are saying. One area I was disappointed in, in the throne speech, was the fact that there was nothing to address foreclosures of farm land, to slow down the foreclosures of farm land.

The Minister of Housing (Mr. Ernst) talked about New Democrats not wanting the public to own anything, that our agenda is for government to own everything. I wonder what the Minister of Housing would feel about bank ownership. We have hundreds and hundreds of acres of farm land now being owned by banks. Is that better? I think we have to look at who is owning the land and what we can do to have the land stay in the farmers' hands.

What is it we can do to help farmers keep their home quarters, because if we really do believe in the rural commu nity, if there is any commitme nt from this government to the rural community they will take some action to keep farmers on the land, to keep farmers working. Every time one of those farmers leaves the land, Madam Deputy Speaker, it impacts on our towns, in our businesses, our schools, and our health care

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISLA TIVE ASSEM BLY OF MANIT OBA 308 systems, everything in the rural community. This government is not taking action to keep farmers on the land. They are not taking any action to stimulate our rural communities, to create jobs, to help us keep our young people on the land, and to keep our young people in small communities. Many of our young people are off to Alberta to work right now. In fact, our son is one of those people. I would very much like to see jobs in Manitoba, not only for my son, but for many of the young people who would rather be here in Manitoba than in other provinces.

Once they leave this province, Madam Deputy Speaker, and put their roots down somewhere else, it is very, very difficult to get them to come back. As I said, the forestry industry is very important to the Swan River constituency, and I am just absolutely disappointed in this government's position on the Repap deal. Imagine, coming out and wining and dining and serving a fancy lunch to the people of Swan River and those in the forestry industry and say, hey, you are going to have it made, 250 jobs in Swan River. Your economy is just going to be growing like crazy.

That was two and a half years ago, and what do we have now? We have close to a hundred people now laid off in the forestry industry. We do not know whether they are going back to work in the new year. We have no jobs. We have no permanent chipper. We have no service centre. What we have is Repap with a broken deal and this government not prepared to do anything with Repap. * (1 530) H this government was committed to the people of Swan River and to the people of The Pas, they would proceed with the environmental hearings.

Automatically, they are going to say, oh, there are members of your caucus that do not want the env ironmental hearing. Pr oceed with the environmental hearing. Let us know what the results are. Let the people of the Swan River area and The Pas get on with their lives. We, on this side of the House, are not preventing the environmental hearing from happening. It is in your hands. You have the power. What is happening, Madam Deputy Speaker, is Repap is being allowed to hide behind this deal.

We know that the people who are doing some of the consulting have been told not to proceed too quickly, because they do not want the environmental hearings to go ahead. This government will not push for the hearings, because they have no commitment to the forestry industry or to the people of Swan River or The Pas. The other people who are very concerned, Madam Deputy Speaker, are the small quota holders. I have written to the minister with regard to this, because small quota holders must cut their wood every two years in order to hold their quota. Some of the quota holders could not cut their quota last year.

Now the forestry industry is going to be shut down again. Are they going to be able to cut their quota? What is the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) doing to protect these people who could lose their quotas? Is this government at least a little bit concerned about this group of people? Madam Deputy Speaker, they tell farmers-this Conservative government, both federally and provincially-that they should take a secondary job to keep their farms going. As much as I disagree with that, I think farmers should be able to make a living at one job just like everybody else does.

They tell us we should take a secondary job, and then they take our secondary jobs away. Those jobs in the forestry are the secondary jobs of farmers. An Honourable Member: They need them. Ms. Wowchuk: Yes, they need those jobs to pay their bills, to pay their taxes. Madam Deputy Speaker, another major issue in the Swan River area is the co-management of resources. I have written to the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr.

Enns) with regard to a meeting that was held in Swan River by the Canadian Institute of Foresters who expected about 35 people at the meeting, but because one of their agenda items was co-management, over 300 people came to that meeting. People want to know what this government's agenda is on co-management. When will co-management happen? Who will be involved? What resources are going to be involved in co-management? This letter went to the Minister of Natural Resources well over two weeks ago and, to date, we have not had a response from him. We have seen good examples of co-management.

We have seen success stories, and I think the government has to be open and honest to discuss this issue. Are they planning to proceed? I would encourage the

309 LEGISLATIVE ASSEM BLY OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 minister and his staff to come to the Swan River area and talk about this issue, tell us what is going on because, Madam Deputy Speaker, when there is lack of informati on or mi sinformat ion in the community, it only leads to hard feelings, and this is something that the government has a responsibility of addressing. Madam Deputy Speaker, transportation is a very important issue here in Manitoba. Manitoba has been known as the hub of transportation for Canada. I wonder why this government never chose to say anything about transportation.

Is it because they would rather not speak about it, they are skeptical about what is going to happen with transportation? Why is this government participating in a series of 29, I believe, meetings on the method of payment across the province when the real crisis in rural Manitoba is the farm economy? Why are they putting all this time and energy into talking about the method of payment? Is it because this government has a plan or is prepared to change the method of payme nt? Is the government going forward with that? We also have no mention in the throne speech of the Port of Churchill, Madam Deputy Speaker.

At the municipal convention in Brandon just recently, two resolutions were passed unanimously by the convention, and one of them was introduced by the City of Brandon, the City of Brandon standing up for the people of Churchill. Well, I wish this government would stand up for the people of Churchill. I see the Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) thinks this is a joke. The Port of Churchill can play a- Point of Order Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Madam Deputy Speaker, I would hope the member would not want to leave that on the record that I think it is a joke.

She said, I wish the government would stand up for Churchill and I, in fact, did. An Honourable Member: Yeah, I bet you did. Mr. Downey: Yes, Madam Deputy Speaker, I take it very seriously, and I would hope she would correct the record in leaving misinterpretation on the record. Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts. *** Ms.

Wowchuk: Madam Deputy Speaker, the Port of Churchill can play an important role in the economy of Manitoba and of western Canada, but somebody in governm ent must show some leadership and that is not happening at the present time. I would at this time like to commend the people of Churchill for the tremendous work they have done. They have travelled to Russia. They have travelled across the country promoting their port and trying to encourage people to use the port.

I had the opportunity to visit Churchill this summer and was very impressed at the capabilities of this port to handle grain, but we need some commitment from this government. Another issue that is im portant for rural Manitobans is rural daycare. The Women's Institute has made many recommendations to this government on how we could implement daycare into rural Manitoba, to rural Canada. They are very concerned, as are all farm families, about the safety of our chi ldren during times of sea sonal employment, during harvest and during seeding when both partners are required to participate in the farm operations.

Because of low income most farm families cannot afford to hire help, and both partners must be involved in the operation. Alberta has taken the initiative, Madam Deputy Speaker, and invested $75,000 into nine new projects to look at differe nt ways of dealing with daycare in the rural area. I would hope this government would look at the initiative taken by Alberta and look at investing some money into our rural communities for the safety of our children. There are many aboriginal people in my constituency.

These aboriginal people are waiting for the government to take action on the Aboriginal Just ice Inquir y report. There are many recommendations which other members have raised that can be implem ented very quickly and without too much cost to government. I would hope government would take those initiatives and start to take some serious action in implementing some of those recommendations. One of the points the government made in the throne speech was that they were not going to increase personal income tax. Granted, they have not increased personal income tax.

They have taxed us through the back door through the GFT in more

December 16 , 19 91 LEGISL ATIVE ASS EMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA 310 ways than one. -(interjection)-They have taxed us through the Gary Film on tax, through the back door. I would like to give you a couple of examples of what this tax is doing to us and what it is costing us. This last year we had the offlo ading of roads onto municipalities. I checked within the department and they tell us that a kilometre of PR road to maintain is about $2,000. That is the cost the department uses. When you figure out then if the cost is $2,000 per kilometre and the R.M. of Swan River had to pick up 40 kilometres that is $80,000.

The population of the R.M. is 3,227 by last statistics. That could be perhaps a little lower now with people leaving the land and having to move away. There may be less people there. That comes out to $24.79 per person. For an average family household of four , that is $99.16 per household. We have not increased our personal income tax, Madam Deputy Speaker, but we have been taxed through the back door by this government. An Honourable Member: Off loading. * (1 540) Ms. Wowchuk: Off loading. LGD of Mountain, the cost will be $26.46 per person in the LGD, well over $1 00 for a family of four.

Let us not believe that this government is- they may not be increasing personal income tax, but I think perhaps that is something this government should look at. Maybe we should be looking at a fairer tax system, a fairer personal income tax system, where those who have the ability to pay can pay a fairer share, those who make money can pay a fairer share and cover the cost rather than taxing through the back door, as this government is choosing to do. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to touch on the right to farm legislation. I am anxiously awaiting to see what this legislation is going to mean.

Is it going to mean that farmers are going to have to protect the land more? What is it going to mean? I believe the land has been given to us and there is only so much land for us to use. We have the responsibi lity of protecting that land for future generations. We cannot abuse the land. If this government is prepared to look at protecting the land and having it there for future generations, that would be good legislation. I have to say that I am very anxiously awaiting the wording of this legislation. Is this right to farm going to protect farmers so they can continue to farm?

Is it going to protect the home quarter so bankers do not become owners of all the land? What is this legislation going to do? As I say, we have to also protect the land for Manitobans, and we have to be sure that The Family Farm Protection Act is not weakened so for eigners can own more of our land. An Honourable Member: Where does your family come from? Ms. Wowchuk: The member across the way asked me where my family came from, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think I made it quite clear to him earlier in the session that my family came from the Ukraine. They came to Canada so they could have land to farm on.

Our ancestors want to continue to farm. Madam Deputy Speaker, education is important to all of us. If our children are to grow, if our children are to participate in changes in society and in new jobs, they must have the opportunity to get a good education. They should have that same opportunity in the rural areas as they do in the urban areas. This government, again, told us that they were not going to increase taxes, but what they have done is offloaded costs of education.

Within the town of Swan River, the average education tax has increased by about $30 per household; within the village of Winnipegosis, the taxes have increased some $24 per home and that is an average. -(interjection)-A combination of both. The member across the way talks about removal of taxes off farmers. Well, I would like to tell him that in our series of meetings across the province there is a real concern about what this government has done with farm taxes. We were told, the recommendation was, that the tax would go onto farm homes. It has now gone onto all farm buildings.

Farmers are feeling that they are doubly taxed because the local levy can go on the land as well as on the buildings. Madam Deputy Speaker, there are many other issues that I would like to raise; however, I realize my time is getting very short. I would like to take this opportunity to say that as we come into this time of celebration, as we prepare for the holiday season, let us each take the time to reflect on our good fortunes and to give consideration to the many in

31 1 LEGISL ATIVE ASS EMBL Y OF MAN ITOBA December 16 , 19 91 this province who are less fortunate than us, as I say, in this province and throughout Canada. It is my hope that we, in this Chamber, can all work together to raise the quality of life both in the urban centres and in the rural centres, so that those less fortunate than us may have the ability to better themselves. It is my hope that as we gather during the next holiday season, they will have had the opportunity to work, the opportunity for a better life. To each of you, I would like to wish a Merry Christmas and a happy holiday.

To those of you of Ukrainian background and to my aunt who is in the gallery, I would like to say Veselykh Svyat i Mnohaya Leeta (Happy Holidays and a Long Life). Mr. Paul Edwards (St. James): Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to rise to respond to the Speech from the Throne. I applied two tests to this speech, the first one, perh aps not a particularly accurate one, but the weight test. This Speech from the Throne is the lightest of any Speech from the Throne in my tenure in this House.

Given thatthere are a certain amount and number of pages that have to be dedicated to general comments in every Speech from the Throne, the fact is, on the weight test alone, the substance in this speech is woefully inadequate for the times, indeed reflects a feeling from the government's ranks apparently that everything is on the rise, we are living in essentially nirvana. There is nothing in this speech which addresses the problems this province is facing in reality. It is an unreal Speech from the Throne, and in many respects, speaks more about this government by what it does not say than what it does say.

The second test I applied was actually to listen to it in the first instance and read it, and read it I did. As I say, the standard comments that are in every Speech from the Throne were there, and that was a number of pages. What I was disconcerted to find was that when it came to the alleged substance in the speech, indeed, it was the same drivel. Madam Deputy Speaker, there is nothing in this Speech from the Throne that recognizes what Manitobans are really going through today in this province.

There is nothing which would give them hope for the future for themselves and for their children, for prosperity in the coming year which we all hope for. It is indeed a pathetic effort at leadership in this province. Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to speak then as much on what is in and not in the Speech from the Throne as about what I envisage and what my party envisages as an agenda for the future. That is indeed, of course, what is left. There is really not much to comment on. You kind of have to fall back, and in order to say something constructive come up with your own agenda.

We, of course, in this party and in the other party wish that we were leading the province. We wish that, but we also recognize that the government is the government, and they do have that responsibility, but increasingly by default they are not governing this province. They are not showing leadership.

The people of this province are desperately, and I sa y that in all candid ness and hon es ty, desperately, and I believe that is the case in every member's constituency in this House, looking for some hope for this province and for this country and some reason to look to their children and say and think that their children might have a reason to stay in this province. We are all looking for that, all of us. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) • (1 550) The members from rural Manitoba in particular, of course, are looking for some hope that people will stay in the rural communities, that is true.

Province wide, we are looking for reasons for people to stay in this province. We are looking for some hope for the future for our children, not just on the farm communities which, of course, we all understand, but for this province generally, Mr. Speaker. It is about time somebody on that side of the House got up and understood that it takes leadership which is not there

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	35-3-8a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	35th 3rd hansardpdf 8a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	f8cce1830e230a73c87fb2e9f78de50043a55efc

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