Manitoba Hansard — Sitting 65 (29th Legislature, 4th Session)

29-4-65

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 2: 30 o'c lock, Thursday, May 4, 1972 Opening Prayer by Mr. Speaker. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS 1657 MR. SPEAKER : Before we proceed I should like to direct the attention of the Honourable :\!embers to the gallery where we have 26 Freshmen students of the University of North Dakota. These students are under the direction of Miss Blaisdell , as our guests . We also have 50 students of Grade 11 standing. These students are from the St. John's lligh School. They are under the direction of Mr. Herstein. This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Inkster.

We also have 70 students of Grade 4 and 5 standing of the Robertson School. These students are under the direction of Mr. Offman and Miss Schroeder. This school is also located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Inkster. On behalf of all the honourable members I welcome you here today. Presenting Petitions; Reading and Rec eiving Petitions; Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees.

Before we proceed I should also like to direct the attention of the Hon ourable Members to the loge on my right where we have as our guest the Honourable Neil Byers, the Minister of Highways for the Province of Saskatchewan. On behalf of the assembled members , it's a pleasure to welcome you. Ministerial Statements. The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MINIST ERIA L STAT EMENTS · HON. LEONARD S. EVANS (Minister of Industry and Commerce) (Brandon Ea st): Mr. Speaker, I have an up-to-date report on the water level situation on the Ass iniboine and the Souris Rivers and rather than read it , Mr.

Speaker , I have copies for each member of the House as well as you, Sir, and possibly some extras for the Press Gallery. Also, Mr. Speaker, I' d like to table a statement on the efforts of the Department of Industry and Commerce with respect to Manitoba's seaport, namely the Port of Churphill. believe it's a seven page document. I do not intend to read the statement , Mr.

Speaker, but I would like to briefly refer to two or three salient points in that seven page documen t ; one of which is that we in the Department of Industry have worked very closely with the Port of Churchill Commis sion, the Norman Regional Development Corporation and the Hudson Bay Route Asso ciation all of which received direct financial assistance from the Manitoba Govern ment to develop the facilities at the Port of Churchill. I can point out, Mr.

Speaker, that one of the major problems at the Port of Churchill now is the necessity to deepen the harbour at Churchill to a minimum depth of at least 40 or 50 feet. At the present time the minimum depth is about 30 feet at low tide which restricts unfortunately, Mr •. Speaker, the size of vessels that can enter the Port of Churchill. I believe the limit now at low tide is no more than 35 , 000 ton cargo carrying vessel. · This compares unfavorably with certain ports on the St. Lawrence where vessels can load in the 75 to 100,0 00 ton range. One other point, Mr. Speaker, before I sit down.

I would point out that although we are working on this particular problem, the grain movements in the Port of Churchill in 71 was at a record of 25 1/2 million bushels and their experiment with shipping two grains , both wheat and barley, was succes sful and it looks as though we should have another shipping record set in 1972. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would also like to table a copy of a brochure entitled Churchill Northern Supply Centre which was prepared by the Department of Industry and Conimerce. Thank you • .MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition.

The Honourable Member for Rhineland on a point of order. MR. JACOB M. FROESE (Rhineland): Yes , on a point of order. Will the total statement appear in Hansard, that wasn't read? .MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Industry and Comm erce. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker, I' d be very pleased lfyou, S ir, would arrange to have the

1658 (l.\1R. EVANS cont'd) ••••• complete statement inserted in Hansard • . l.\1R. SPEA KER: That can be arranged. STATEMENT BY THE HONOURABLE LEONARD S. EV ANS OONCERNING MANITOBA •s SEAPORT - CHURCHILL May 4, 1972 I would like to make a statement regarding the Prairie Provinces only direct access to ocean shipping, the Manitoba seaport of Churchill. As has been the case in previous years, the Port of Churchill has received considerable attention over the past twelve months from the Department of Industry and Commerce.

We are determined that this great natural asset of the province will be developed to its maximum potential. In this endeavour we work very closely with other institutions which have a stake in the port. These include the Port of Churchill Commission, the Port of Churchill Authority, the Hudson Bay Route Asso ciation , The Government of the Northwest Territories , the Norman Regional Development Corporation, the Ministry of Transport, the National Harbour's Board and the Canadian Wheat Board. That list alone speaks for the effort that is put in on behalf of Churchill.

Three of these institutions , the Norman Regional Development Corporation, the Hudson Bay Route Association and the Port of Churchill Commission, receive direct financial as sistance from my Department. In fact, it would not be unreasonable to assume that without our assistance there would be no Port -of Churchill Commission or Norman Regional Development Corporation as we know them today. We support these organizations who work hard ·and ef fectively for the port and I believe that if you ask these organizations you will find that they feel my Department is a very willing helper to them in their projects.

We have certainly exhibited our readiness to go the ext_ra mile when necessary. Both myself and my Department have spent considerable resources during the past year attempting to get the Federal Government to reface their dock at Churchill am to dredge the harbour to a minimum depth of 40 to 50 feet. This is unquestionably the priority item if Churchill is to remain a competitive port. The harbour at present has a minimum depth of about 30 feet at low tide.

This restricts the port to vessels that can carry no more than 35, 000 tons of cargo and when such large loads are taken on the vessel must top off and clear at high tide. Competing ports in the St. Lawrence can load vessels in the 75 to 100, 000 ton range or even more and the freight rates on such vessels are very competitive with Churchill rates. This means that unless Churchill harbour is deepened the historic freight advantage provided by the Hudson Bay route will have been eroded away.

I have taken this matter up personally with Ottawa officials and on at least three oc casions have raised the issue with Mr. Jamieson. As with so many things regarding Churchill the wheels seem to turn terribly slowly. To date no commitment has been made on deepening the harbour to 40-50 ft. , but at least an undertaking was made at the Hudson Bay Route Con vention on April lOth that there would be maintenance dredging of the berths this year to their charted depth of 32 ft.

We have also spent considerable time with the Hudson Bay Route Assoc iation and the Port of Churchill Commission in working out a priority list of recommendations. Naturally we feel the deepening of the harbour should be at the top of this list and they have agreed with this. We took this initiative so that the overall effort of the various institutions can be coordinated and not be dissipated over a wide range of admittedly worthy projects. The grain movement that took place in 1971 wa5 significant in several ways. Firstly, it was a bushel shipment record, with 25, 489, 000 bushels being cleared.

Secondly, the experi ment with shipping two grains , wheat and barley, worked very- well. So well in fact that it is to be repeated this year. - It looks very much as though a new Churchill shipping record will be set in 1972, {ierhaps as much as 27 million bushels. While I am very gratified that this increase will take place I am not conviliced that w,; have reached the limit at Churchill.

We will continue to }lush for increased sales ex Churchill, either within the present season or by extendmg the season. - In particular in a telegram of March 17, 1972 I urged the Russian Ambassador in Ottawa to use Churchill for Russian grain shipment this year. Although_ no reply has yet been received, my staff are continuing to discuss and press this matter with the Wheat Board. Because the grain movement is so 'dominant in the Churchill shipping scene many people think that th�t is all the port handles. This, of course, is not the case. One of our major

f ' t. May 4, 1972 1659 efforts is to try and increase the movement of non-grain items through Churc hill. For instance , during the past year we examined the potential for shipping such products as rapeseed oil and flour ex Churchill. While neither of these goods moved to export markets via this port we have not given up the idea of handling such products through Churchill. On the import side we have carried out cost comparisons between Easterf Canadian ports and Churchill on several types of goods, notably tractors and automobiles.

Th ' idea of using . containers as a means of sparking Churchill trade has also been examined. Th ls is not yet economically feasible, but it may be neces sary to proceed with plans in this direction in the interests of Churchill development. My Department continues to pursue this issue very active ly in consultation with the Port of Churchill Commission, potential users, and shippers. The proposal that Churchill be made a free port is under study at the present time by my Department jointly with the Federal Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce.

The basic idea of such a free port is to import raw materials or components to the free port area and manufacture or assemble a finished product for ultimate export. Goods which have a high spoilage or weight loss may be brought into a free port for sorting or drying so that duty is only paid on that which is actually brought into the country. Canada has a very flexible system of bonding warehouses and customs rebates which can provide most , if not all, of the advantages of a free port without incurring the costs of operating such a port.

However , both my Depart ment and the Federal Department felt that a definitive study was required to determine once and for all whether there is an advantage to Churchill in operating a free port area. This study should be finished by tbe late summer or early fall. Several items related to ocean shipping to and from Churchill were also examined during the past twelve months. The new Arctic pollution regulations caused conside rable work to en sure that these regulations would not unnecessarily hinder shipment!l to and from Churchill. This was accomplished.

We also pressed to have representatives from Lloyds of London visit Churchill and view conditions first hand. The insurance people have assured us that they in tend to visit Churchill but we have not been able to get them to commit themselves to a firm date. We are continuing to pursue this issue. As has already been mentioned in the Legislature very distressing news has recently emanated from Churchill concerning re-supply shipments. It was rumoured that the Federal Government had decided not to use Churchill for the sealift portion of their re-supply efforts in 1972.

We were shocked to hear this rumour and immediately contacted the Ministry of Transport. I am hopeful that this matter has been successfully resolved but I cannot be cer lain as Mr. Jamieson has not replied to my query as yet. Our interest in re-supply shipments goes back at least two years when the matter of stationing a re-supply vessel at Churchill so as to lengthen the re-supply shipping season came under study. This turned out to be a lengthy investigation involving the CNR , Transair , other carriers , the Northwest Territorial Government and Federal authorities.

The findings from this work were turned over to the Federal Crown Corporation, Northern Transportation Company Limited. However, progress remains slow as Ottawa has embarked on yet another study of the logistics of northern re-supply. In fact, matters have moved so slowly that we have decided to look at a couple of other options which we might be able to carry out on our own. Unfortunately these are still in the formative stages and I have nothing definite to report as yet.

In a further effort to promote Churchill as a supply centre the Departmen t had a brochure on the facilities and advantages of Churchill printed. This publication proved to be so success ful that a scond printing has had to be ordered. The acce}tance of this brochure and the energetic use to which it is being put by the various carriers and the port promotional agencies is very heartening. The scope of its application has been broadened and we are hopeful that it will have desirable repercussions in areas other than just re-supply. We see Churchill as the most logical re-supply route to the central Arctic.

Its excellent sea, rail and air facilities coupled with its location within 800 miles of all major .central Arctic points gives it many advantages over its competitor, the Port of Montreal. The routing of such cargo through Churchill would benefit the port itseU as well as the Province of Manitoba and the other Prairie Provin ces. I can assure you that the matter of re-supply shipments through Churchill will be pressed in every possible way with the Federal Government and I would ask interested members of the opposition to join us in this effort.

My Department has examined many possible 'industrial developments for thE;l Churchill area but in most cases these have been fruitless, However, there is a modest success that

1660 May 4, 1972 can be mentioned. A pelletizing mill to make use of the grain screenings at Churchill is going to be installed in the power house area where the screenings used to be burned for power. The employment benefits etc. to Churchill will not be large but nevertheless it is at least a positive step. The $10 million Federal-Provincial program to rehabilitate the Churchill townsite is proceeding as planned. El iminating the fragmented nature of the various segments that made up Churchill will go a long way toward creating a vital and viable centre.

The infrastructure improvements will ensure that the new community is a healthy and desirable place to live while the medical and educational investments will further Churchill •s place as a regional service centre. I would like at this time to commend the Port of Churchill Commission and the Hudson Bay Route Asso ciation for their dedication in promoting the Port. The officers of these organ izations donate a considerable amount of their personal time and resources in the belief that Churchill can benefit from their efforts. Such unselfish action is all too rare these days.

While we may not always agree with their position we cannot help but admire their dedication and honest zeal. We look forward to working with these and other organizations for the benefit of the people of Churchill and Manitoba. I would also like to commend the MLA for Churchill for his activities in respect of promotion of the Port of Churchill. He has been particularly active in this regard over such matters as the Arctic re-su pply operation, Russian grain ship ments , and the need to develop Churchill into a fully modern port if it is to achieve its full potential. ·.

I hope that this brief statement on some of our activities with regard to Churchill in the last twelve months has served to illustrate our deep and abiding interest in this Port. Manitoba has an obligation to see that this unique natural asset is fully utilized and I assure you that we are trying to do this. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the OppOsition. MR . SIDNEY SPIVAK, Q. C. (Leader of the Opposition)(River Heights) : Mr. Speaker, just a comment with respect to the remarks of the Minister of Industry and Commerce.

I realize that he did not read the full seven pages that were presented to us but there are certain things that I think should be said with respect to the report. I gather the report will not contain or does not contain any reference to the potential that Churchill may have as the supply depot for the Pan Arctic development in the Arctic.

At the present time supplies are coming through Alberta and the benefits of that particular development, which realistically is north of Manitoba, is going to the Province of Alberta, the goods purchased, the supply that is taking place, the repair work that is being done, all of this is taking place in Alberta. It would seem to me, Mr.

Speaker , that when we talk in terms of the Port of Churchill we talk in terms of a new dimension, a dimension which is much greater than anything that has ever been anticipated and which goes far beyond the remarks that the Minister of Industry and Commerce has presented and far more than the arguments that have been advanced.

The Minister of Industry and Commerce has repeated in this presentation, . as far as I can see from just from a cursory glance and from the remarks that he said, the same arguments that have been advanced over the years with respect to the province and the Federal Government over the use of Churchill. But there is a potential, Mr. Speaker, for Churchill as wei! as for some other north"rn areas of Manitoba to in fact become the supply centre for the total Pan Arctic development and whose potential development of $7 billion can come to a large extent through Manitoba and benefit Manitobans .

And I would hope that there would be much more seriouE cons ideration given to this prospect because this is the way in which Churchill will truly de velop. MR . SPEAKE R: Ministerial Statements and Tabling of Reports. The Honourable Minis ter of Transportation. HON. PETER BURTNIAK (Minister of Highways)(Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, I have a report here that I would like to table. I believe this is the right report. I suppose that this will make the Honourable Member for Lakeside quite happy as I promised some time ago , and I hope we're talking about the same report that I'm tabling here.

It's the Task Force Study of Administration, District Office, Department of Highways, MR . SPEAKE R: Notices of Motion; Introduction of Bills. The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs.

May 4, 1972 1661 INTRODUCTION OF BILLS HON, HOWARD R, PAWLEY (Minister of Municipal Affairs)(Se lkirk) introduced Bill No. 45,

an Act to amend The Munic ipal Act, MR . SPEAKER: Oral Questions. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD MR . SPIVAK: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Fi nance , my question would be to the Fi rst Minister. I wonder whether he can indicate now that the mill rate appears to be available for consideration with respect to Unicity taxes that will be levied , whether the government intends to alter the million and a half that is in the estimates for equalization ? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Fi rst Mi nister. HON. EDWARD SCHREYER (Premier) (Rossm ere) : Mr. Speaker; there must be a . difference in

interpretation as to the intent or the purpose of the monies which the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is referring to. The purpose of those monies had no direct connec tion with any general mill rate that would be struck by the Unicity Council. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition, MR . SPIVAK: In view of the fact that the mill rate -- actually a sec ond question, Mr. Speaker , in view of the fact that the mill rate that has been announced by Unicity will in fact mean a substantial rise in taxes by those who live in the suburban areas ••• MR . SPEAKER: Order, please.

The honourable member is arguing the question , Would he place it ? MR . SPIVAK: I wonder if the First Minister could indicate whether he believes that the million and a half that is proposed in the estimates for equalization will in fact satisfy the need of equaliz ing the increased costs to those people who lived in the suburbs before, who are now going to be recei ving the new tax bills from Unicity ? MR � SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR , PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, the question relates to a newspaper article, This is the only information in respect to this matter that is forthcoming to the government , There has been no opportunity to evaluate the information that is in the newspaper article. Until such time as there is an opportunity to evaluate the information in today•s newspaper, I will be unable to make any further comment. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Leader of the Opposition, MR. SPIVAK: A supplementary question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

I wonder whether he can indicate whether it 's the government 's intention to bring in supplementary estimates once that evaluation has taken place ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR . PAWLEY: Mr, Speaker, I return to ni.y earlier answer. Until there is a proper evaluation it would not be in order to make any comment , MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR . JOSEPH P, BOROWSKI (Thompson) : Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier .

I wonder if he'd indicate to the House what steps the government is taking to re cover the 86 percent of the MDF funds that were used on a down payment for Rex Grose. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Fi rst Minister. MR . SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member for Thomps on has an intriguing way of putting certain questions , I am not in a position to answer in any definitive way at the moment . MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR . BOROWSKI: My question is for the Attorney-General, Mr. Speaker, Is the Attorney-General planning on taking any action against Mr. Roblin and Mr.

Evans for mislead ing the House on the CFI deal as indicated by the inquiry? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris, MR . WARNER H. JORGEN&>N (Morr is): Mr. Speaker, that question is obviously out of order. MR . SPEAKER: I'm afraid I must concur with the Honourable Member for Morris. The two gentlemen that were mentioned are not members of this House so I can't see how they could be mislea ding it.

1662 May 4, 1972 (MR . SPEAKER cont'

d) The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR . FROESE : Mr. Speaker , I'd like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Is it true that the population of Thompson has reduced roughly 5, 000 within the last six months ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour, HON, RUSSELL PAULLEY (Minister of Labour)(Transcona): Mr.

Speaker, I don't really know whether it is true or not, There appears to be some conflicting figures regarding the total population at Thompson and I believe that it has been announced somewhere, I just forget , Sir, where , that there is being a check made on the total population figure for Thompson, and if it does not become public soon enough or if I get it , I'l l be glad to give it to my honourable friend. · MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR . FROESE : I'd like to direct a further question to the Honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs.

In view of the reduction of population in Thompson, is the government still proceeding with their housing in Thompson? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR . PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, the entire question relating to the housing in the City of Thompson is presently under review. All factors are being considered and appropriate in dication or announcement of policy will be made at the earliest opportunity, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR . BOROWSKI: Mr. Speaker; I have a question for the Minister of Industry and Commerce.

Could he indicate how many jobs will result from giving the multi million dollar contract to Western Flyer Coach -- the school bus contract to Western Flyer Coach instea d of Ontario ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR . EVANS: Mr. Speaker, my information is that as a result of this contract for 113 school buses , there will be 45 new jobs or additional jobs provided for people in the Town of Morris , which happens to be in the constituency of my good friend from Morris. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR .

JORGENSON: I wonder if the Minister of Trade and Commerce could assure those workers who will be thus employed some permanency in their occupations. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR . EVANS : Mr. Speaker, we have made great efforts since we've been government to bolster industry in the Town of Morris. I can also point out, Mr. Speaker, that a considerable amount of work, a considerable amount of work on urban transit buses is also done in the Town of Morris, as I think my honourable friend knows. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR.

JORGENSON: I wonder if the Minister could advise the House if the proposed ex- · pans ion of We stern Coach Industries will take place in the Town of Morris - in keeping with � the government's stated intention to diversify industry ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR . EVANS: Mr. Speaker, the objective of the Government of Manitoba, of this government to develop the entire Province of Manitoba, whether it be Morris, Se :kirk, Wi nnipeg, Napinka, Killarney, Wawanesa, Boissevain and all other points . MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris who ••• MR .

JORGENSON: I wonder if the Minister of Industry and Commerce would undertake to answer the questio n that I posed to him. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. MR . JEAN ALLARD (Rupertslan�: In view of the Minister 's answer, I'd like to ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs whether the government is building any public housing in the Pine Falls � Powerview area ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR . PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, there have been approaches made to the government and to representatives of the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation in regard to the possibility of building houses in the area referred to. The need is being surveyed at the present time as to whether or not that housing should proceed on that basis or on some other type of approach such as co-operative housing. When final decision s are made it will be indicated as .to whether or not we will be proceeding or not.

May 4, 1972 1663 MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland, MR. ALLARD: I would like to ask the Minister whether a 200 unit co-op housing develop- ment is being planned and developed in Thompson? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs, MR. PAWLEY: Mr. Speaker, could the question be repeated? MR. ALLARD: Whether the Minister could tell the House whether a 200 unit co-op hous ing development is being planned and developed for Thompson? MR.

PAWLEY: There is a co-operative housing development proposed for Thompson, not in the neighbourhood, I believe, of 200 units, but there is co-operative housing planned for Thompson along the equity sweat lines of co-operative construction similar to that in Nova Scotia, MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. MR. ALLARD: In view of the 590 vacant units in Thompson, will this be gone along with immediately or will there be a holdup? MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. PAWLEY: Mr.

Speaker, the co-operative housing is on the basis of local interest and involvement by a group of employees at Inco that are interested in developing a co-operative housing project. There have been discussions between them and the officials of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and they are of the view, and I would suspect that CMHC would also be of the view, that present developments at Thompsori would not jeopardize this particular co-operativ� housing development, MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge. MRS. INEZ TRUEMAN (Fort Rouge): Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Honourable Minister of Health and Social Development, Could he tell the House why Dr. Asselstine has resigned from his position as Director of the Child Guidance Clinic ? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health and Social Development. HON. RENE E, TOUPIN (Minister of Health and Social Development)(Springfield): Well, Mr. Speaker, on the question asked by the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, first of all, Dr.

Asselstine made his reasons public and not to me, he made it public to the newspapers, and the reasons that were given as known by the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, is that he was dissatisfied with the lack of policy pertaining to child development in the Province of Manitoba.

Any my response to the press was, and I repeat, that the child development that has taken place within the Province of Manitoba now through the preparation of a White Paper on health care for the Province of Manitoba, and the estimates that were presented last year in this House pertaining to child development that are in ihe process of being presented to this House for 1972/73, contain more funds, more staff man-years pertaining to child development care than we have seen in the ten years that the Conservatives were in power. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge, MRS. TRUE MAN: Mr.

Speaker, since the Minister has in effect confirmed the fact that Dr. Asselstine's reasons given in the paper were correct, can he tell us who is responsible for the four year delay in spending the money that was budgeted and where did the money go instead of to Child Guidance? MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health and Social Development. MR. TOUPIN: Mr.

Speaker, if the House would allow, I would have to ask the honourable member what monies she's referring tci, If the honourable member would like to file an Order for Return I'd get her the information that are at the disposal of the Department of Health and Social Development. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tourism and Recreation. HON. LAURENT DESJ ARDINS (Minister of Tourism, Recreation and Cultural Affairs) (St. Boniface): Mr.

Speaker, yesterday I tab Led the answer to an Order for Return of the Hon ourable Member from Roblin and he later added that the complete answer wasn't there, and if this is acceptable I'd like to give the information now. He wanted to know the total amount of money expended to date by the Province of Manitoba and the Federal Government in the Turtle Mountain Provincial Park, The totai amount is $334, 000; Federal share, 50 percent. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rock Lake, MR. HENRY J, EINARSON (Rock Lake): Mr.

Speaker, I direct this question to the Minister of Agriculture, In view of the press statement yesterday giving the figures in the way of grants that farmers received in the assistance for water and sewage, it stated that towns

1664 May 4, 1972 (MR. EINARSON cont'd) •.••• will now be able to come under that policy, can he indicate what towns in the Province of Manitoba are going to receive this assistance and what is the structure of grants ? MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Agri culture. HON. SAMUEL USKIW (Minister of Agriculture) (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker , some time during this sessi on a statement will be made to the House on that subject matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. HARRY J. ENNS (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I direct a question, to the Honourable the Northern Commiss ioner. I wonder , Sir, if he could indicate to the House the summer cutting

schedule to be undertaken at the CFI Complex, the number of native persons so employ ed , or to be expected to be so employed in the coming year. MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. HON. RON McBRYDE (Commissioner of Northern Affairs)(The Pas) : Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that the subject matter referred to comes under my jurisdiction. MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Lakeside • . MR. ENNS: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to the Northern Commissioner.

Would the Honourable Commissioner be kind enough to direct me to the proper authority ? (Interjection)-- Would the Honourable Commissioner be kind enough to direct me to the correct authority ? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR. McBRYDE: I direct the Member for Lakeside to the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, then to the Honourable the Acting Minister of rines and Natural Resources , again the same question.

I would assume that the cutting i not necess arily now under way, but what kind of forward contracts have been arrived at with th native popula tions , the tribes and so forth, for the coming cutting season at CFI ? The number of people so employed? MR. SPEAKE R: The Honourable First Minister. MR . SCHREYER: Mr. Speaker, on a Jx>int of order. Here again we have an example of a· question which seeks information that pertains to the internal operation and management of a Crown Corporation that is unrelated to policy.

If it had to do with policy then the question would be in order , but as the Honourable Member for Lakeside knows, the entity he is referr ing to is in receivership, a Court appointed receivership, it is therefore not, for more reasons than one, it is not possible , nor is it proper to deal with a question of that kind in the House. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, and it's not my wish to pursue it.

It is though a fact , Sir , that the Minister from time to time issues releas es , indicates to us what is happening at CFI from the point of view of how the plant is operating, or what projected sales are to be , and I think in that manner, and it's in that light certainly that I ask for this kind of information. I would like a simple question of the kind of work force , particularly the native work force currently employed or to be employed this summer at that Complex. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister. MR.

SCHREYER: I would suggest further that in any case the honourable member is asking for the kind of detailed information which is more properly subject for an Order for Return, Although even on that basis, Sir , I suggest once again, that matters of day to day operation are not to be equated with matters pertaining to policy direction. MR. SPEAKER : Order please. A point of order was raised. I wish to indicate that I have to concur with the First Minister's remarks in regard to the propriety of the question. The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR. EARL McKELLAR (Souris-Killarney): Mr.

Speaker, I' d like to direct a question to the Minister of Health and Social Development. About four weeks ago I asked the Minister a question regarding a lengthy report dealing with the Ninette Sanatorium. Has the Minister and his government anything to report regarding the lengthy relx>rt ? Are they going to accept the recommendations ? MR. SPEA KER: The Ho?ourable Minister of Health and Development. MR. TOUPIN: Mr. Speaker, this is still under review by the Provincial Government, hopefully that many other reports and recommendations that are before different Ministers of

f ' May 4, 1972 1665 (MR. TOUPIN cont'd) . the Crown could be reviewed more effectively and quickly once this Session ends. . MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Souris-Kii larney. MR. McKELLAR: Mr. Speaker , a supplementary question to the Honourable Minister. Does he realize that there are people out the re, 134 employees are waiting to hear what the government are going to recommend? MR. SPEA KER: Order, please. The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: Mr. Speaker, I direct a question to the Honourable The Minister of Educa tion.

I wonder, Sir, if the honourable member can now tell me who the Chairman is of the Board of Reference that is dealing with the question of a boundary matter between the Lake shore School Division and the White Horse Plains School Division ? MR. SPEAKER : The Honourable Minister of Education. HON. BEN HANUSCHAK (Minister of Ed ucation)(Burrows): Yes, a Chairman of the Board of Reference to deal with this matter has been appointed. I must apologize that the name of the individual slips my mind at the present time.

He is not from the school division; and I may also suggest to the honourable member that the appointment is made by way of Order-in- Council which is a matter of public record. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell. MR._HA RRY E. GRAHAM (Birtle-Rus sell): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources. Can the Minister outline the steps and pro cedures to be taken by .farmers in applying for compensation for flood damage in the Assiniboine Valley? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, I'm not exactly sure of the implications of this particular question. I believe the honourable member has reference to the operations of the Shellmouth Dam and certain high waters that are now being experienced on the Assiniboine River, and as I explained yesterday, I believe, or the day before, we have no responsibility for any compen sation payments in this respect.

Furthermore, as I also explained, we, through the Department of Water Resources, gave a very clear, a very clear explanation of the operations in the Shellmouth Dam, and it was clearly stated to the farmers in the district who wished to attend the meeting -- this was back in December and I believe officials of three rural municipalities were involved -- that there could be no guarantee that there would be no flooding; although the Shellmouth Dam would alleviate a lot of flooding, those farmers in the low-lying areas , in the flood plain areas, so called, would still be subject to some high water. MR.

SPEAK ER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell. MR. GRAHAM: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. If the province will not assume any compensation, can the Minister indicate what other jurisdiction he would recom mend the farmers apply to ? MR. SPEA KER: The Honourable First Minister. MR. SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker , it should be pointed out to the Honourable Member for Birtle-Russell that as the Minister of Mines and Resources has already indicated on two occasions, there was systematic means taken to inform local residents of the probability of water levels, specific water levels on the downstream part of the Assiniboine River, down stream of the Dam.

And further to that, I can advise the honourable member that water levels on that stretch of the Assiniboine River have exceeded the level at which it is at the present time for at least six years in the past two decades , at which time there was no compensation paid to my knowledge. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Birtle-Rus sell. MR. GRAHAM: Another supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Will the Minister of Mines and Natural Resources consult with the farmers in future before any decision is made in how much water is going to be allowed to go through the dam? INTRODUC TION OF GUESTS MR.

SpEAKER: Before we proceed, I should like to direct the attention of the honourable 'members where we have some more guests , some 46 students of Grade 7 and 8 standing of the Sprucedale School of Dryden, Ontario. They are under the direction of Mr. McFa yden. On behalf of all the honourable members I welcome you here.

1666 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD (cont'

d) MR . SPEAKER: The Honoura ble Member for Rupertsland. May 4, 1972 MR . ALLARD: I'd like to direct a question, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health, Could he advise the House as to what steps the government is taking to deal with what has effectively become a problem of abortion on demand, as is evi dent from the figures that have been released ju st lately. It's called therapeutic ••• MR . SPEAKE R: Order, please, The ques tion is argument ative. The Honoura ble Member for Ruper tsland. MR .

ALLARD: May I ask the Minister to tell the House what steps the governm ent is taking to deal with the problem of abortio n on demand in our society ? MR . SPEAKE R: The Honourable Minis ter of Health and Social Development. MR . TOUPIN: Mr. Speaker, I believe that all honourab le members of this House are aware that when we discuss the ques tion of abortions that this falls under the Criminal Code, and the policy of this gov ernment as spe lled out before has accepted to pay for under Medicare for abortions that are legally accepted in Canada, So it's not really, Mr.

Speaker, within the jurisdiction of the province itself to discuss and arrive at maybe a satisfactory solution accord ing to the Honourable Member for Ruper tsland pertaining to abortions. We are only going according to what is allowed under the Criminal Code. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. · MR . ALLARD: Well to clear up the answer, if I may, I would like . MR . SPEAKE R: Order, please. Order. I wish he wouldn 't debate it, I wish he would ask the question. MR .

ALLARD: Co uld the Minister advise the House whether it is the policy of the gov ernment to refrain because of cons titu tional constraint from the field of abortion? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourab le Minister of Health and Social Developm ent. MR . TOUPIN: Mr. Speaker, the policy of this government is to actually -- yeah, actually, like the Premier says, respect the laws of Canada, and pay for therapeutic abortions that are spelt out within the Criminal Code. MR . SPEAKE R: The Honourable Member for Rupertsland. MR . ALLARD: Are we forbidden from entering the field legally? MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Health. It's a legal ques tion. MR . TOUPIN: Mr. Speaker, I'l l have to consult with my legal couns el, MR . SPEAKER: The Honoura ble Minister of Tourism and Recreation. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, I would ask leave to make a statement. MR . SPEAKE R: The Honourable Minis ter of .Tourism and Recreation asks leave of the House to make a statement, We are under the ques tion period, is leave granted? MR . DESJARDINS: A statement on lotteries, MR . SPEAKE R: A statement on which? The Honourable Member from Morris, MR .

JORG ENSON: We have no objection to th e Minister asking for authority or leave to revert to motions so that any statement that he makes may be commented upon by the Mem bers of the Opposi tion. And if he wants to ask for authority to revert to motions we'd be happy to give him that leave. MR . SPEAKER: Is that the desi re of the Honourable Minister? We shall revert to Ministerial Statements, MR. McKELLAR: ••• eliminate the rest of the question period? MR . SPEAKER: No, We are going to revert to the ministerial statement

section of our orders. The Honourable Minister. MR . DESJARDINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I apologize for being a little late, I was at a meeting, I'd like to make the following statement: New recreational programs ut ilizing lottery funds. MR . SPEAKER: Order please. Does the Honourable Minister have a copy for the Leader of the Oppos ition, and one for myself? MINISTERIAL STATEMENT MR . DESJARDINS: Ju st a minute, I have another one here. There's one of each, A major new policy invo lving the use of lottery funds for recreational purposes has been approved by Cabinet for imp lementation.

This is in keeping with the Ji:tilosophy of the.Lotteries Act which provided that government lotteries revenue should be used for recreational and

, May 4, 1972 1667 (MR. DESJARDINS cont'd) ••••• cultural purposes, These new programs made possible by the use of lottery funds will help to satisfy many of the pressing recreational needs which are in evidence in many areas throughout the province. Since becoming Minister of this depart ment I have become increasingly aware of the needs which have been identified to me through research, correspondence, reports , briefs, delegations, sports associ ations, and through many personal contacts in communities a'nd individuals during vi�its to various provincial regions.

Programs that are proposed have been designed to provide new and meaningful oppor tunities for recreation with particular emJi!.asis on the area where recreational opportunities have been limited or non-existent. The province, of course, could not and has no intention of taking over recreational programming. One of the purposes of the program is to stimulate and encourage communities, local organizations and provincial bodies to develop and expand their resources and services in order to fill the needs that are present.

In a large part the success in a community of recreational programming rests with the community and it is intended that the new proposal will assist communities and existing organizations to develop and extend their own resources. Four major programs have been developed. 1. Assistance to communities for recreational facilities capital cost: Financial assistance on a cost-sharing basis will be provided for the construction of new capital facilities. The objective is to provide recreational facilities on an equitable basis for all residents of the Province regardless of where they might live. 2.

Game Development Program: This proposal is to develop a program to involve Manitobans in a series of competitive sports activities with the following goals: (

a) To stimulate interest in and· provide opportunities for those wishing to participate in competitive athletics • . (

b) To provide assistance and conduct trials and training programs , and to select and train athletes who may qualify to participate in major sporting events. (

c) To initiate a Northern Regional Games Ev ent in December, 1972 to allow northern communities to engage in a ma jor multi-sports games and to serve as a pilot project for the development of other Regional and Provincial Games. 3. Grants to recreation and sports agencies: This program will: (

a) Enable the recreational agencies to plan and develop services and programs which will enhance, improve, and expand recreational opportunities throughout Manitoba. Particular emphasis will be given to those areas and people not reached by existing pro grams. (

b) Enable the Provincial Am ateur Sports Body to plan and develop a comprehensive competitive sports program to enable Manitoba athletes to participate in Provincial and National Events and other competitive events at the level beyond the local community . 4. Community Recreational Development Projects: · This will provide for special projects to be administered by the community recreational branch focusing in particular upon providing recreational opportunities for the underprivileged, the handicapped and those deprived of normal recreational opportunities.

Details of each of these programs will be developed further and announced in due course. Now the paper on the Cultural Allocation of Lottery Revenues for Cultural Development, It is the intention of the Manitoba Government to allocate • • • MR . SPEAKER: Order , please. The Honourable Minister didn't send a copy of that to myself. MR . DESJARDINS : You have one, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: No, I only have the copy of the Recreational Program, nothing on the Cultural Development, MR , DESJARDINS : Where•s the page boy. I give him one. MR . SPEAKER: What have you got ? Give one to Sidney. MR .

DESJARDINS: Well I gave him one. MR . SPEAKER: Order , please. We have one copy of the Cultural Affairs statement nothing else. MR . DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker, I believe that the page boy gave copies to members of

1668 May 4, 1972 (MR. DESJA RDINS (Cont 'd) • . • the Liberal Party. He thought there was only one and this is the second one, and I don't know where the other one went. MR. SPEAK ER: Well I should like to -- Order, please . . Order , please. I should like : o indicate that if we would do things in the proper sequence then we would not run into this kind of a problem. We are reverting from our normal procedures and consequently the con fusion arise s. MR. DESJARDINS : I can't hear a word you'r e saying. MR. SPEAKER: Give that to the Leader of the Opposition. The Honourable Minister might proceed now. MR.

DESJAR DINS: Allocation of Lottery Revenues for Cultural Development. It is the intention of the Manitoba Government to allocate lottery revenues to recreational and cultural projects. It is now des irable to outline some of the approved project proposals with respect to cultural development and some of the criteria to be observed in carrying out these programs , We intend to expand the opportunities for all Manitobans to enjoy and participate in cultural activities.

Emphasis will be placed on facilities , rate of production and employment rela ted to the arts , including outreach services for the economically deprived. By share with federal and municipal governments and the private sector the financial support for artistic endeav our, it is hoped that the preservation of the rich ethnic cultural inheritance in the inheritence of native Canadians will be achieved.

There will be a particular effort made towards cultural development in northern Manitoba, particularly in isolated communities, AIJlong the project proposals in the area of cultural development, the following are worthy of nore· Special cultur�l project des igned to enable and assist touring programs and exhibits leadership train ing programs and workshops ; incentive cost sharing programs for arts and crafts materials. Free outdoor summer-winter festival support. MR . SPEAK ER: Would you keep it down to a shcut. MR .

DESJARDINS : Historical cultural site and building preservation programs and archives exhibit and promotional campaign, and a fund for special events and activities to be promoted by the department. Establishment of an ethnic cultural development capital fund to assist in capital developments of projects on the basis of grants of $1. 00 for every $3. 00 raised from sources other than the Provincial Government to a maximum of $50 , 000 in any given year.

Esta blish ment of an ethnic cultural development program fund for allocation to central co-ordinating bodies concerned with the pres ervation of the ethnic cultural inheritance in the province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAK ER: The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. L. R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry ): Mr.

Speaker, one can not help but have enthusiasm for the concepts that are incorporated in the policies and programs ju st announced by the Minister , in particular the emphasis on making recreational programs available to all parts of the province, and the people in all parts of the province, with an emphasis on the northern part of the province and on our native peoples , in particular , that promise is a very welcome one and one which this party supports most enthusiastically.

The same is true of the developments contemplated and projected in the field of culture and the preservation of our rich cultural heritage and the different contributions of the ethnic groupings that make up our Manitoba community. We would be interested in some advice as to some of the details , financial and personnel wi se, involved in some of these programs , Mr. Speaker.

The assistance to ·communities for recr eational facilities in the capital costs area under the four major programs in a recre ational level announced by the Minister leaves us with the question as to whether this ass istance will be made in the form of grants or loans , and how much money will be involved, but we expect the Minister will be advising the House and the people on that subject shortly. I would say , Mr.

Speaker, that I find both the programs imaginative and constructive and I would hope that the programs planned in the cultural development area would also include a reaffirmation of support for the cultural organiza tions and groups and inst itutions that have already brought much credit and glory to the Province of Manitoba. The Wi nnipeg Symphony, the Ballet , the Festival du Voyageur, and other organizations of that kind. We would hope that the Minister will continue to lend the strongest support to those programs in addition to introducing new ones.

May 4, 1972 1669 ORAL QUESTION PERIOD (Cont'

d) MR . SPEAKER : We will revert back to the question period. The Honourable Member for Souris-Killarney. MR , McKELLAR: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Acting - Oh I guess he's gone now - First Minister. Could the Minister advise the House who ordered the sand bagging of the inlet into Pelican Lake on the Pembina River about ten days ago wllich eliminates any fresh water coming into this lake ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister, MR . SCHREYER: Mr.

Speaker, obviously that question will require some checking, so take it as notice, and the Honourable the Minister, Acting Minister of Mines and Resources hopefully will be able to reply in a few days. MR . SPEAKER : The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR . FROESE: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Honourable the Minister Of Industry and Commerce, Has there been any request or will the Manitoba Developme nt Corporation be financing • • • MR . SPEAKER: Order, please. I wonder if the Honourable Member would take the question under advisement and repeat it tomorrow. The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR .

BORO WSKI: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the First Minister. In view of the statement made by City Council last night regarding the possible increase of bus fares for old age pensi oners, and in view ofthe fact that the Provincial Government grants over half a million dollars of provincial funds to keep the bus fares down for old age pensioners, will the Govern ment take any action against the City if they do so increase the fares ? MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable First Minister, MR . SCHREYER: Well, Mr.

Speaker, it is true that the Province of Manitoba has in the past year adopted a policy of increased provincial grants to cities for purposes of urban transportation, urban transit, and I can advise the "honourable member that a meeting is to take place fairly soon between representatives of the Crown and representatives of the City of Winnipeg to discuss urban transit and related matters, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside, MR . ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, discussing question of meetings I wonder if the First Minister would consider meeting with perhaps representatives of the Canadian Manufacturing Association relatively soon to discuss the impact of the five percent tax soon to be imposed on purchasing on production equipment, MR . SPEAKER: The lionourable First Minister. MR . SCHREYER: Well, Mr. Speaker, about four to six weeks ago members of the Government did have a meeting with representatives of the Canadian Manufacturers Association and at that time a number of matters of mutual interest concerned were discussed.

There was no particular emphasis placed on problems of taxation policy. Certainly not initiated by the members of the Manufacturers Association at that time. Insofar as the tax on production machinery is concerned since Manitoba's action is in line with a number of other Canadian Provinces and the States of Minnesota and North Dakota, I don't know that there is anything undue or unusual here that would prompt members of the Association to want to initiate dis cussions, MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR . ENNS: Mr.

Speaker, I recognize that and I would be out of order, if I would ask the First Minister if the government informed them at that time of their intention to impose the tax? But, Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister, is the First Minister aware that, or has the government been informed that Quebec has not imposed, has exempted the eight percent sales tax from production machinery up until the time of the year 1975 I under stand? MR .

SPEAKER : Order, please, Before the Minister answers I would like to indicate that the Honourable Member for Lakeside was prefacing and indicating that he was out of order. The next time he will not succeed. I'll take it as notice that he is going to be out of order and not let him continue. Do we have an agreement? The Honourable Minister of Finance, HO N. SAUL CHER NIACK, Q. C. (Min ister ofFinance) (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, we've been at this Production Machinery Tax Bill 21 for I'd say nine days or so, and I would propose to answer the question - I'm just saying - I propose to answer the question at the right

1670 May 4, 1972 (MR . CHERNIACK Cont'

d) time knowing it could come up today under Proper Rules of Procedures, not under the Question Period. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR . FRO ESE: Mr. Speaker, I hope to ask my question this time. I would like to direct the question to the Minister of Industry and Commerce. Has he had any request, or will the Manitoba Development Corporation be financing Neonex of Vancouver in the expansion of the W inkier plant ? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR. EVANS: Mr. Speaker. As far as I am concerned that question ranges in the hypo thetical. MR.

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Roblin. MR. J. WALLY McKENZIE (Roblin): I have a question for the Minister of Tourism and Recreation. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Honourable Minister of the $560 , 000 , I think it was, that Manitoba received from Canada in the last year, how is that money split between the various ethnic groups in this province. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tourism and Recreation. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker,, I'm not too sure if I understand exactly what amount, and I would suggest the Honourable Member file an Order for Return. MR .

SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Crescentwood. MR. CY GONICK (Crescentwood): ••• question for the Attorney-Gener al. In view of the indication from the Federal Government that the discount houses on taxation, tax returns and unemployment insurance is a provincial matter, does the Attorney-General intend to take action against them? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. A. H. MACKLING, Q. C. (Attorney-General) (St. James): Mr.

Speaker, I think I have already indicated publicly that that attitude of the Federal Government surprises me, however, I am having my department look into the matter immediately. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Crescentwood. MR . GONICK: A question to the Minister of Industry and Commerce. In view of the large size of the Neonex Corporation, does the loan to the Neonex Corporation indicate a change in the policy of MDC with respect to its loan policy to large corporations? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, I am not sure whether ! understand the Honourable Member. I think he is implying that there is a loan made by MDC to Neonex, and I never gave any indi cation that this was the case. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Crescentwood. MR. GO NICK: A supplementary question then. Would the Minister agree to inform the House at some future date whether or not there has been a loan to Neonex Corporation, or subsidiary of the Neonex Corporation? MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister. MR. EVANS: Mr.

Speaker, any loans made since the Act was amended is a matter of public record but to the best of my knowledge no loan has never been made in this period to Neonex. Neonex of course is one of those large holding companies and it has hundreds of sub sidiaries. Now whether it happens to have a subsidiary now in its control that happened at one time to have had a loan from the MDF or MDC I am not in a position to say. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The Honourable Minister is hypothesising. The Honourable Member for Crescentwood. MR . GO NICK: Yes. A second supplementary on that.

Would the Minister inform the House at some future point whether or not the Housing Corporation, the Housing Construction Company which has received a loan from the MDC is connected to Neonex Corporation? The one that is building prefabricated homes. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Industry and Commerce. MR . EV ANS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will look into this matter. MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur. MR. J, DOUGLAS WATT (Arthur): Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Recreation and Cultural Affairs.

My question is arising out of the statement he made a few moments ago in the House. I am wondering if those communities that have applied to the Minister, because of a statement that he made some montlJ

May 4, 1972 1671 (MR. WATT Cont'd) ••• ago that there would be grants, and projects that are now under way, will they qualify for the grants that has been announced in the Minister's statement of a moment ago. MR . SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Tourism and Recreation. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker , further information will be given very shortly in structing the different communities how to apply for these funds. MR, SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Arthur . MR. WATT: Mr.

Speaker , will this communication be sent out to those communities that have applied to the Minister -- (Interje ction) -- not necessa rily Reston, Melita and Medora - and if you want I've got a whole list of them. MR. SPEAKER; Order , Order, The Honourable Minister, MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Speaker , the statement will be made public. MR. SPEAKER: Orders of the Day, The Honourable House Leader, MR . PAUL LEY: I wonder, Mr. Speaker , whether you'd call the motion standing norm ally in the hands of the Minister of Finance. MR, SPEAKER: Oh, I'm sorry, Orders -- I'm sorry.

Under Orders of the Day, the first item is introduction of an Order for Return by the Honourable Member for Charleswood, The Honourable Member for Charleswood, ORDERS OF THE DAY - ORDERS FOR RETURN MR, ARTHUR MOUG (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker , I beg to move, se conded by the Honourable Member for Pembina THAT an Order of the House do issue for a Return showing the following information: 1, How many people left the Province of Manitoba during the period of October 30 , 1971 to April 30 , 1972, 2.

How many people moved into the Province of Manitoba during the above period, 3, What was the percentage of unemployment in the Province of Manitoba on October 30 , 1971, 4, What was the percentage of unemployment in the Province of Manitoba on April 30 , 1972, 5, How many civil servants were employed by the Provincial Government as of October 30 , 1971 , 6. How many civil servants were employed by the Provincial Government as of April 30 , 1972 , MR, SPEAKER presented the motion. MR , SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Labour. MR , PAULLEY: Mr.

Speaker , I do not stand to reject the subj ect matter of the Or der for Return introduced by my honourable friend, however , some of the information will not simply be available for a long period of time, The information dealing with the outflow and inflow of people is compiled, I understand, by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.

And then in reg2rd to the unemployment figures , my honourable friend asked for the information as of April 30 of this year which is only three or four days gone, If he would be content to accept it at the date on which I have the last report for the unemployment figures comparative; and also the same in respect of the request made by the member dealing with the munber of civil servan ts, If that's agreea ble, with those reser vations , which are not really reservat ions, I'd be glad to fulfill as much of the Order as I can as quickly as I can, MR.

SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried, MR. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Finance, MR. CHERNIACK, Mr. Speaker , I beg to move , seconded by the Honourable Minister of Labour that Mr, Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a com mittee of the Whole to consider the following bill: No, 21 -

An Act to amend The Revenue Tax Act, The Tobacco Tax Act, and The Amuse ments Act. MR. SPEAKER presented the motion and after a voice vote declared the motion carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole with the Honourable Member for Logan in the Chair,

1672 May 4, 1972 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE MR . CHAffiMA N: Clause 12. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR . SPIV AK: Mr. Chairman, we have debated this matter for several days and during the course of debate informa tion has been provided to the House by the Minister. We've also been in a position to obtain additional informa tion, and one of the most startling things , Mr.

Chairman, and one which I think justifies the initial criticism we have of the bill, is the fact that we are in a position, and I think the Minister should comm end that, to indicate that the National Assembly of the Province of Quebec on April 18 - that is the Government of the Province of Quebec - announced in a National Assembly on April 18th, that a sales tax ex emption would be given in respect of production equipment. Such equipment had been pre viously subject to an eight percent sales tax applicable in the province.

The proposed ex emption came into effect on the night of the announcement, that is April 18th of 72, and is to remain in force until March 31, 1975. The announced purpose of this specific tax reduction is to spur industrial development in Quebec by reducing production costs for Quebec based enterprises and indirectly by reducing the selling price of goods manufactured in that province. The exemption is limited by certain exclusions, among them office fixtures, miscellaneous heating and lighting equipment, etc. ; which means that the Quebec situation is not entirely comparable with Manitoba.

However, the Quebec proposal includes a proportional sales tax abatement for sales made by Quebec firms outside of Quebec. There is also provision for reduction in the sales tax paid on cer tain taxable item s purchased by Quebec owned enterprises. Now, Mr. Chairman, I believe that this is a significan t and important matter to be con sidered by this Legislature as ·it is asked to give approval for the inclusion of production ma chinery by the present government in the five percent sales tax.

And although there was a reference in the Budget Debate to other jurisdictions including Quebec as being jurisdictions which had a simila r provision, I think it's very serious that there was not an indication to the House that an exemption had been given at this particular time.

Now I do not know, and I am not in a position yet because the documents are not in our possession to deal with the exact manner in which the proposal was brought forward, but I would believe that the reason that the Provincial Government of Quebec would in fact exempt production equipment from the sales tax would be because they were concerned and interested about jobs in Quebec and they were interested in the ability of industry in Quebec to be able to compete in the markets of Canada and in the markets of the world. Quebec has had serious problems with respect to its economy.

It has had a serious situation wit h respect to unemployment, a very high unemployment rate. But one must recog nize as well that although our statisti cs have indicated effectively a six percent unemployment rate for the last few months, Dr. Weldon in his presentation before the Standing Committee of Economic Development indicated that in his opinion the likelihood is that we really truly have an eight percent unemployment rate, particularly when those of our native people are included in the statistics as they are now not included in the statistics. On this basis, Mr.

Chairman, we have to consider Manitoba's position with respect to this particular tax. Are we going to penalize development in Manitoba? A MEMBER: Yes we are. MR. SPIV AK: Are we going to penalize future jobs ? A MEMBER: Yes we are. MR. SPIV AK: Are we going to make it more diff icult for our industries to compete in addition to the costs that are being transferred to the people of Manitoba who are the con sumers ? Are we in fact, Mr. Speaker, - and I've indicated this before - adding another nail into the coffin in Manitoba.

Are we putting ourselves in the position of taxing and taxing for monies that are required by government but which really will prevent and which will have the effect of inhi biting our development, inhibiting the opportunity of growth for industry, and in fact preventing and taking away from people now and people yesterday jobs that they have now and jobs that they can have. The Honourable Member for Thompson said we said that yesterday, but what he didn't know is that Quebec had taken it off; and the reason Quebec took it off was for a very valid reason.

They took it off because it wants to create jobs in this province because it is con cerned about unemployment and because it's concerned about its ability for its manufacturers

May 4, 1972 1673 (MR. SPIV AK cont'd) •.••• to be able to compete in western Canada, or in Canada, or in the world markets. But the government is so preoccupied with the necessity of raising money, and rais ing money for its spending and for its program, that that doesn't become a considera tion or a fact or. Now; Mr. Chairman, from our point of view, and we've had limited time in this, it's diff icult to establish even and to be able to relate a .total assess ment of the considerations that go into the ability of industry to compete in any given area.

There are certain things · that we know. ·we know we suffer fro m serious fr eight rate disadvantages. We suff er because we are in a pos ition where We have to import many of our goods that are finally processed and manu factured and fabrica ted in this province and in order to bring them from their sources to Manitoba, there is a fairly heavy cost.

We know that we have the additional cost that has to be borne and added to the goods that are sold of bringing them to market- of course the farther the market is the more costly it is for us - and yet there are potentials for us in those markets, and we have proven that we can compete in those markets because we have proven that we have both quality and design, imagination, creativity in those products that we sell from this prov ince.

Secondly, we know as well that in addition to that becaus e of the fact that there was not the capital available for development and because we did not have access to the technological information that was easily available to those corporations and those areas that are more sophisti cated and were closer to the markets and closer to the sources of capital, that we've been inhibited in our total development because as technology changed we did not necessarily catch up and our efficiency was affected by that and for that reason our costs have increased. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the manufactur ing sector, the mining sector are important sectors of employment in this province. We're in this poSition: We as a province if we're going to be able to hold the people that are here, the people that will be coming off the land, the children who are not going to find their lives on the farm, who are going to be in a pos ition to be able to remain in Manitoba, we are going to have that kind of industrial development which will give opportunity. And in effect what the government is doing and what the government would like to rush through this House, is

an Act which will retard our development, prevent the opportunities that can be Manitoban's, preventthe further opportunity for technological change to occur with respect to industry because our people will be prepared to invest in eff iciency, and prevent as well the location of new industrial developments in this province. And all of this means one thing, Mr. Chairman. It means jobs in Manitoba.

It means jobs .in the next six months, it means jobs in the years to come and it essen tially comes down to the remarks that the Honourable Member from Lakeside has already made, that in effect what we are doing is we are taxing jobs. We are taxing jobs for those goods that will be sold in Manitoba that consumers are going to be paying fo r. For those goods that are going to be sold outside of Manitoba the people outside of Manitoba are going to have to pay for it.

If anyone believes that Manitobans are going to be able to compete with the highest personal tax, the highest corporate tax and with the production tax now when other provinces are removing it, then their logic iS very silly, their reasoning is wrong and their direction itself with respect to the economy is mistaken. Now, Mr. Chairman, I think we have to come to a very valid conclusion.

That the government because it has no economic development policy, because it does not understand the neces si ty of planning for the fut ure and of trying to retain people in this province, because it still believes that the answers to the unemployment si tuation will be in the investment of pUblic money and the continuous investment of pUblic money, and because of a natural distaste for private endeavour, for all of these reasons, they are prepared to extend the tentacles of the sales tax on production machinery and prevent again our further devalopment.

Quebec has seen different and it has seen diff erent beca use its people have remained there and they are unemployed there. Manitobans will not remain in Manitoba, they will leave.

And this along with the general attitude will no doUbt have the effect of reducing the opportuni ties for people, for our young people, and chasing them out of Manitoba and will in turn direct industries -- and I don't want to go into that detail again becaus e I think the Minister is very much aware of the fact that industries will be directed to other areas, not only because of this particular tax measure but because of others -- and it would seem to me, Mr. Chairman, that the government has to answer this and answer this at this particular time. MR. CHAIRMAN: Clause 12. The Honourable Member for Rhineland.

1674 May 4, 1972 MR. FROESE: Mr. Chairman, I too wish to comment once more in connection with the bill bef ore us because the

section that we are dealing with which is to delete a very important

section of the Revenue Tax Act which exempted various items previously now will be subject to tax and I feel it's going to hit the agricultural industry to a very considerable extent. We just heard today, it's been mentioned and it's been brought to our attention that people are leaving Thompson because of unemployment, they're coming to southern Manitoba, and cer tainly we have a hard time employing people in the south, the people that we have here, and by deleting this

section we will now be taxing certain things that would not be taxable before. I note that from the Act under 4 (1) which exempts the various articles, it mentions under (i) "farm implements, farm machinery and repair parts therefor as defined in the regulations but not including any vehicle required to be registered under the Highway Traff ic Act or re pair parts thereof. " And (j) - Agricultural feeds ; and (k) - the plants of any kind and there is a number of them mentioned. But, Mr.

Chairman, certainly we know of the situation today of rail line abandonment; we know of the elevators that are being closed down and we will have to erect new ones. We will have to put up new elevator space in this province and this means that when this is going to happen that this tax will apply.

It is not exempt under this section, under 4 (1) that I just read out, and therefore it will mean that any new elevator space and the inland storage that will be provided will be subject to tax and therefore it will hit the agricultural industry which is already depressed and for which the prices of the commodities that we get are far too low and therefo re I take exception to deleting subsection 3 of

Section 4 of the Revenue Tax Act. We know what happened just recently when Federal Grain was sold out to the Pools, and when the Minister mentioned that the industries or the companies will be gaining by it because 50 percent will be used for tax credits, well we know that the pools, the co-ops don't pay tax, so in their case it can't be used as a tax credit. Secondly, the elevator companies, especially the local elevator companies haven't been making money, in fact some of them have been losing money in this Province, a good number of them, so that there again it won't be a tax credit that they can apply.

I, for one, am worried about the pools taking over all these private companies which did pay tax bef ore, which no longer will now be paying taxes because the pool takes them over, and we are just getting one big monopoly in the province today where the grain farmer no longer has a choice in de livering his grain or selling his grain to the elevator of his choice. If the elevator man offers him a grade he has to accept it, he can no longer go to a second place or another elevator man so that he could probably get a better grade and a better price. This is no longer open to him.

But again we will have to provide new elevator space in this province and this will now be taxable under the provisions of this Act when we delete this other section, and this will take large amounts of money. Inland terminals will cost a lot of money and the farmers will be required to pay that money that will be invested in these terminals. So that they will have to pay the cost for the terminals, they will also have to pay the cost of this additional tax that will now be applied as a result of the bill and of the particular

section that we're deleting and that is under discussion at the present time. So, Mr. Chairman, I feel quite strongly that certainly the economy at the present time is not one where this should happen or this should take place, and we should not be repealing that particular

section of the Revenue Tax Act. MR. CHAffiMAN : Clause 12 - passed. The Honourable Member for Lakeside. MR. ENNS: No, Mr. Chairman, we shall not let it pass as of yet. Mr. Chairman, I have never been one to have accepted the basis that is often used by any government, or any Minist<Jr that because others to it we should be doing it.

I've attempted, Sir, in the past re marks that I have made on this Bill that we should always, particularly this kind of a bill, look at our own unique Manitoba situation; indeed look for places that we can put ourselves into a position of advantage and not disadvantage by merely doing what others are doing in the province. This bill is no different and this Minister is no different, he went out of his way, Mr.

Chairman, in the budget speech to indicate to us that what the imposition of the sales tax at this particular time meant, was just that, he was doing what other provinces had done pre viously, and of course at that time it was correct, and I refer back to the budget speech for the Honourable Minister on Page 24 of his budget speech when he indicated that the inclusion of production machinery on the provincial sales tax base will bring our legislation into line with a majority of nine provinces which have sales taxation. At present five provinces,

May 4, 1972 1675 (MR. ENNS cont'd) ••••• British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ont ario, Quebec, andN ewfound land apply their sales taxes to production machinery. Mr. Speaker, I know, of course, that at the time that budget address was prepared that was the case. It no longer is the case as we have found out, and as I'm sure the Minister has found out, and I am more than anxious to hear the Minister's reply in this particular respect.

I am som ewhat surprised though that he had -- and I must assume that certainly if not he himse lf, because I recogni ze that he's been tied to the House pretty well with the debate, · but surely, Mr.

Chairman, members of his st aff, his department, senior fis cal and financial advisers would have been among the first to inform him of the action that has taken place in (�uebec, with respect to the lifting of this sales tax on production m·achine ry, and that he should have so informed us at his earliest possi ble moment, so that we do not debate a question of this importance under any misi nformation, which now the budget spe ech, which is barely a month old, that he made, is, whEm he includes the Province of Quebec as being one who levies this particular form of taxation. Mr.

Chairman, the question that it also raises is that one can't help but also have some uneasiness about any other times that other provinces are used, as per example, a great deal of discuss ion has taken place partic ularly by the Honourable Member for Brandon West, with respect to the effects of this tax on the aircraft ind ustry, the leas ing of aircraft and so forth, the taxing of aircraft in flight, the use of air space over provin ces, we have been assured by the Honourable Minister of Finance that essentially what we're doing here in Manitoba is in effect the same as has been done in some other jurisdictions.

Well, Mr. Chairman, a little while ago we received that assu rance that that was the case with produc tion machinery. It now is not the case and I ask the Min ister to re-examine his pos ition and indicate to us, and in fact find out the details for us, which he is much better adept at, he has much better staff than we have in Opposition.

Sir, we have to rely on the limited means of research and st aff that we have, it means hustling our best when we can in our private hours to find out infor mation such as this, and I think there is some responsibility on the Minister of Fi nance to indicate important changes, fiscal changes li ke that that are happening in the province, in the country, to the Chamber, at the earliest possi ble mome nt so that we don't debate in circles in this Chamber. Mr.

Chairman, if the Province of Quebec has seen fit to change its taxation, a taxation that I remind honourable membe rs, in particular government me mbers, that had been imposed and had been in effect, and how easy it is - and I speak with some experience - to maintain a tax once you've gone through the pains of imposing it on a particular se ctor, Very few govern ments, of all political description, really, you know, find the courage necess ary sometimes to lift a tax once they have already imposed it and it has imposed for a number of years. Nonetheless, Mr.

Chairman, in the Province of Quebec just that kind of an action was taken on April 18th, just that kind of an action was taken on April 18th. And, Mr. Chairman, 1 would doubt, very much whether the First Minis ter of this province would suggest that even with his press ing need for money that the Province of Quebec, and the Government of Quebep has not an equally pressing need for the collection of revenues for the services that they re quire and their people require in that province.

But, Sir, they saw the wisdom of the argu ments that we have been attempting to make on this side of the House, they saw the wisdom of the arguments that we've been attempting to make on this si de of the House, and, Mr • . Chairman, I appeal to the Honourable Minister of Finance, that surely he now too can see that wisdom and it is not too late to reconsi der the inclusion of this particular claus e in the bill. Indeed, Mr.

Chairman, if he should cast his eyes about and suggest different areas which it is his responsibility of collection of revenues that he would lose as a result of the deletion of this claus e, I would want to assure him that he would receive perhaps a degree of consideration that would surprise him from this si de of the House, at least from me, if he would be pre pared to reconsider this particula r clause. This clause is, Mr. Chairman, I repeat, a tax ation of jobs; it is not good for Mani toba at this time, and it should be repealed. MR. CHAIRMAN: Claus e 12 passed - The Honourable Member from Fort Garry. MR.

SHERMAN: Mr. Chairman, I would like to read into the record behind the re marks that were made by my Leader a few moments ago, and by my Deputy Leader just now, some comments from the Chairman of the Manitoba Branch of the Ca nadian Manufacturers Assoc iation, Mr. John A. Ingram, which were conveyed to our party in the form of a letter, Sir, on the subject of this legislation, and in particular the subject of this claus e that we are

1676 May 4, 1972 (MR. SHERMAN cont'd) ••••• studying at the present time. I would like to have the letter on the record because it underscores -- I beg your pardon, Mr. Chairman? Yes, I will table it afterwards, and I'd like to have it on the record because it underscores some of the points we've been trying to make and some of the arguments we've been trying to convey to the Minister; The letter was addressed to my Leader with copies to the Honourable Member for Lakeside, and myself, and it reacts: "Dear Mr.

Spivak: The CMA has already conveyed to the Miliister of Finance its great concern over the taxation of production machinery under Bill 21 amending the Revenue Tax Act, and I enclose a further copy of our letter in which we cover this matter and the question of taxation of pollution control equipment. You will note that we urge some form of relief for such pollution control equipment similar to the rebate system existi.tlg in Ontario. Until Bill 21 was issued we were quite unaware that consumables or production supplies are also to be taxed since the budget proposals did not specific ally refer to this category.

Many industries use great quantities of such consumables often on a con tinually and daily basis, and to apply such a levy will present an intolerable cost burden on such companies. In the broad category of consumables we also feel that short life span items such as tools, jigs, dyes, etc., should be exempt. Ontario presently does provide for relief of such items and it is our understanding that Quebec is presently arranging for similar relief recognizing the inequity that would otherwise result.

From many comments we have received ftom our members it is clear that manufa cturers clearly recognize the further cost burden that must result from the imposition of tax on production machinery and on consumable items as well as on pollution abatement equipment. Such levies can do absolutely nothing for the economic growth of this Province and will, as you surely appr'eciate, serve as yet further deterrents to new industry and investment. What this province needs is tax incentives, not disincentives.

We commend you and your colleagues for the stand that you are taking on this vital issue and we wish you on behalf of our membership every success. Sincerely, J. A. lngram, Chairman, Manitoba Branch of the Canadian Manufacturers Association. " That letter, Mr. Chairman, is dated May 3rd, 1972, and I am pleased to have the opportunity to table it with the Committee. Mr. Chairman, I would like to add that that letter, a copy of which was sent to ·me as I indicated, was accompanied also by a copy of a letter which the same officer of the Canadian Manufacturers Association, Manitoba Branch Chairman, J.

A. lngram, had written on April 21st of this year to the Minister of Finance, precisely on this particular subject, with specific reference to the diff iculties that would accrue in his view in the area of pollution abatement equipment, and as you will note in the letter that I read into the record, there is reference to that argument. The refer ence stems from the letter of April 21st which Mr. lngram wrote to the Minister of Finance. Mr.

Chairman, I would like to have that letter on the record, as I say, in support of the arguments we have tried to convey to the Minister in the area of disincentives to industry and difficulties for our economy. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. BOROWSKI: Mr. Chairman, I know that the Minister of Finance is tired and weary, i think we're all tired and weary of listening to that recycle debate that's been going on and on and on. I think we have reached the point where the Opposition is suffer ing from an advanced case of statistical scurvy.

They are so desperate for figu res, they are now quotingtheFinance Minister's figures back to him that he just quoted the other day, and I wonder how much longer this obvious filibuster is going to last. --(Interjection)-- Well, I'm ••• MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. MR. BOROWSKI: This is the first time, Mr. Chairman, I've heard a filibuster equated with freedom, I don't see the connection. However, when it comes, Mr. Chairman, I think when it comes to staying power these peasants on this side can outsit them any time.

I think we proved that during the last session when we sat here til four in the morning and the other side caved in, ami I suggest it's going to happen again. We've got all the time in the world; if you want to play games at public expense, we'll play games too; we'll sit here and answer your silly charges. Just to show you how silly they are, Mr; Chairman, the Member from Lakeside got up and he berated the government for doing certain things because of someone else. He said you really shouldn't do it just because some other province does it; you really shouldn't do it, this

' May 4, 1972 1677 (MR. BOROWSKI con 'td) . • • • • is Manitoba, we have unique problems and therefore you should take a new approach. The Leader of the Opposition who was up just before him said he should rescind the tax or do away with this

section because Quebec yesterday rescinded the tax. He's telling us because Quebec did it, we should do it. His Deputy Leader a few minutes later said just the oppo site and I think that maybe they should get together and make up their mind what they want this government to do.

I consider, you know, even going as far as they did, I consider the whole argument of the Leader of the Oppos ition an insult to suggest to us that because Quebec did it that we must do it. 'Almost to say to the people of Manitoba, particularly the New Democratic Party, that it doesn't matter what your philo sophy is, it doesn't ma tter on which you get elected, if big Quebec - and Quebec does swing a lot of weight in Confederation - if Quebec does some thing that we throw our philosophy, socialist philo sophy or whatever you want to call it, we throw it out the window and do what Quebec does.

If that is the case you know I'm wasting my time sitting here. We may as well all pack up and leave and simply let the bureaucrats pass the legislation that Ontario and Quebec does because there's no question we're effected; we're also greatly effected with what United States does. But we do have a unique philosophy of our own and we do make mistakes once in a while, We expect that that will happen. We don't ma ke the type of mistakes that the Opposition did on the CFI Complex or the Columbia Forest Industries. The other point I'd like to comme nt on, Mr. Chairman, is the question of taxing jobs.

They seem to be making a big pitch to the working people that somehow this taxation is going to tax jobs and thereby hurt the people of Ma nitoba. Well, Mr.

Chairman, the Churchill Forest Industry was supposed to bring jobs for Manitoba, and I think the Leader of the Opposition who was Minister of Industry and Commerce has stood up in this House and boasted about that on several occasions, but we found on taking office that the jobs that he did create were for Quebec people, and I know they're Canadians; for Saskatchewan people, which was in a state of depression due to the Liberal policies, as Quebec is today as a result of Dourassa's policies. So we blew $115 million to create jobs for somebody else.

And this g-oes down the line to the garment industry where he went traipsing around the Mediterranean for his friends in the garment industry, bringing cheap labour for the garment industry, using taxpayers money to create jobs. For whom ? Who was he creating jobs for, Mr. �eaker? For people that he brought in from the Phil ippines who six months after they arrived here went on welfare because they couldn't live on that minimum wage, which I believe at that time was $1. 25.

This is the man that's so concerned about jobs, he left Manitobans unemployed; he left 30, 000 Manitobans living on a minimum wage while he went out scouring the markets of the world to bring cheap labour into this province. This is the man that sits there and talks to this government, and chastises this government about destroying the oppor tunities for Manitobans. So, Mr.

Chairman, that I consider an insult and I think the Oppo sition should stop making those foolish statements, stop pondering to the Manufacturers Asso ciation and Chamber of Commerce and let's get down to the job of serving the people of Manitoba that all of us claim we're here for. MR. CHAffiMAN: Clause 12 -- The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. JORGENSON: Mr. Chairman, we have once again received a lecture on parlia mentary procedure by the Member for Thompson - the best authority I suppose that they could raise on that side of the House.

He was given some pretty wide latitude in making his re marks and I don't intend to take the same latitude but I do intend to reply to some of the com ments that he made. In the first place, Sir, he des cribed the Opposition's opposition to this bill as filibuster ing. Sir, it's nothing of the sort. It is oppos ition to a bill that we oppo se. We've indicated our oppositi on to the bill when we voted against it on second reading. We indicated at that time that we were going to oppo se some of the clauses and that we are doing. That, Sir, is our responsibility to do. That is our determination.

That 's our determination. How long we want to oppo se it will depend on how long we want to oppo se it, and we don't intend to take any dictation from the Member from Thompson as to when we are going to close up and fold up our tents and walk away. Our job, Sir, as an Opposition is to mobilize public opinion, is to inform the public through debate in this Chamber, to legislation that is going to affect them. If we had failed to do that nobody would have known that that ta.'l: was going to be imposed until after it had been passe d. --:(Interjection)-- Well the Member for Th ompson said that's ridicu lous.

It is only when an opposition raises those matters in the House that they become public

16 78 May 4, 1972 (MR. JORGENSON cont'd) • through the press and people become aware of what the government are attempting to do. That is our responsibility and we intend to carry that re sponsibility on, notwithstanding any of the whimpering cries from the Member for Thompson who seems to think that because he's on the government side of the House that all we are here for is to stand up and praise them for what they do. Well, Sir, we don't intend to do that.

In the first place it's awf ully difficult to praise them for anything they do; and secondly, we would be denying the people of this province the kind of an opposition to government that they're entitled to have. It was a fo rmer Minister of Mines and Resources, the Member for Inkster, who stood up during the Throne Speech debate and said that the Q?position weren'tdoing the job, they weren't opposing. --(Interjection)-- Well you can't have it both ways.

Either we are supposed to oppose or we're not. --(Interjection)-- So now the Member for Thompson tries to tell us --(Interjection)-- to pick the subject for us and tell us how we must oppose it. They want to be our speechwriters over there. Well I tell you, Sir, I tell you, Sir, it won't work that way because we intend to oppose what we think is wrong and, Sir, that bill as far as we're concerned is wrong and we're going to continue to oppose it. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Order, please. I accept the chastisement from the Honourable Member from Morris that I allowed the Member for Thompson latitude.

I hope that he will realize that I allowed him just as much latitude. However I shall call the next member who speaks to order if he doesn't continue on the subject that we're dealing with. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition. MR. SPIVAK: Well, Mr. Chairman, my intention is to talk on the subject but the Honourable Member from Thompson has exhibited the qualities and characteristics that he possesses of being a combination of Joe McCarthy and Archie Bunker. MR. CHAIRMAN: You're not on the subject that's under discussion. MR. SPIV AK: It is a question of privilege on my part, Mr. Chairman. MR.

CHAIRMAN: Then you're raising it as a question of privile ge? MR. SPIV AK: He has made references with respect to cheap labour, and he has made reference to the fact that I, as Minister of Industry and Commerce, --(Interjection)-- Yes, he did make refer ence to that. And, Mr. Chairman, this is not the only occasion in which the Minister has --(Interjection)-- Well he's not allowed to have rules fo r himself. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Minister of Finance. MR. CHERNIACK: Mr. Chairman, you yourself said that you gave the Member for Morris latitude because you'd given the Member for Thompson.

You also indicated you were not going to give further speakers latitude. The Leader of the Opposition started to speak and then when he was called to order decided it was a question of privilege. Well, Mr. Chairman, I don't believe that an accusation by the member about actions taken by a former Minister in relation to the employment situation is indeed a matter of privilege. Now I'm no expert of the rules, I just don't think it is, do you? •· MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

I think the point Is well taken and if the member felt that he had a point of privilege he should have raised it at the time that it was committed. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition speaking to the clause. --(Interjection)-- Point of order. The Honourable Member for Rhineland. " MR. FROESE: On the point of order, I think the matter that was just raised, does that mean that we just have two privileged members in this House? MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I don't think that was a point of order. The Honour able Member fo r Rhineland has had latitude also. The Leader of the Opposition on Clause 12. MR.

SPIV AK: On a point of privilege. If a demagogue is going to be unleashed in. this House, then surely to God we are going to be entitled to be able to answer, and this is in effect what we have in this Committee right today and this is what we have had constantly from the actions of the Member for Thompson. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. A point of order. MR. CHERNIACK: ••• member called another member a demagogue- I haven't checked lately what the rules say but surely that's not a question of privilege on his behalf to be able to call somebody else a name. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Member for Inkster. MR.

SIDNEY GREEN, Q. C. (Inkster): Mr. Chairman, on a point of privilege. The Honourable the Leader of the Opposition if I may come to his defence said if a demagogue is to be unleashed in this House and I'm certain that he must have been referring to himself.

May 4, 1972 1679 MR. CHAffiMAN: The HonoUrable Leader of the Opposition on Clause 12. 1\ffi. SPIVAK: Mr. Chairman, our concern on this si de has been that the result of pass ing Clause 12 will have the effect on the development of employment opportunities in this province. We have sa id that. The Honourable Member from Thompson seems to believe that the previous government was not concerned about that. Well he's entitled to his opinion and we can give whatever weight we want to his opinion.

He seems to think that it was unusual that the previous government may have been concerned about immigration into this province but the Honourable Member from Thompson does not understand --(Interjection)-- MR. CHAffiMAN: The Honourable Minister on a po int of order. MR. CHERNIACK: •.. impress ion that you stated that you would expect a member who spoke after your admonition would stick to the

section itself and should not have the latitude that you gave to the Members for Morris and Thompson. Now I don't know whether the Leader of the Opposition actually believes that he is dealing with the question bef ore us, or if he is indeed dealing with a speech made which you, Mr. Chairman, ruled out of order. Now are we going to debate generalities again or are we going to stick to the section. MR. CHAffiMAN: We're going to stick to the section. The Honourable Member for Lakes ide. MR. ENNS: ••• will now clarify the situation in the House or in the Committee as to who the Chairman of this Committee is. MR.

CHAffiMAN: I beg your pardon. Would you repeat that remark pleas e? MR. ENNS: I wonder, Sir, on a point of order whether you would clarify for all mem- bers of this Committee now as to who the Chairman of this Committee is. MR. CHAffiMAN: Are you reflecting upon the Chair ? MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, MR. CHAffiM AN: I'm asking the Honourable Member for Lakeside if he is reflecting upon the Chair. MR. ENNS: Mr. Chairman, I'm reflecting upon the duties assumed by the Minister of Finance to interpret what I up to now would imagine the duties of the Chair are. MR. CHAffiMAN: Order.

It is the duty of the Chair and it also is the duty of every member of this Legislature, if there's a breach of privilege or order in this House, to bring it to the attention of the Chairman. And for the inf ormation of the Honourable Member for Lakeside there is one Chairman in this Committee and I am he. The Honourable Leader of the Opposition to Clause 12. MR. SPIVAK: Mr. Chairman, the Honourable Minis ter presented his Budget and indi cated that this particular

section was in other jurisd ictions including the Province of Quebec. At the time he said that he was correct. --(Interjection)-- MR. CHAffiMAN: Point of order being raised ? MR. CHERNIACK: The honourable member has just made the same kind of a speech just half an hour ago. Now is that not repetitious ? MR. SPIVAK: Now, Mr. Chairman, Mr.

Chairman, to begin with, at this particular point on the point of order, the Honourable Minister has at this point no way in which he can be sure what I'm going to say and my answers are to the Honourable Member fro m Thompson who suggested a filibuster and who was not concerned about the Province of Quebec. Mr. Chairman, let me sa y this to the Honourable Member from Thompson. When the Honourable Minister of Finance introduced his Budget he could not know at that time tJ;tat Quebec would be removing production machinery from its sa les tax. They did so afterw ards.

And by doing that they indicated their concern because of unemployment in Quebec and in Canada for jobs, and, Mr. Chairman, our whole thrust and direction in opposing this has been because of our concern for two phases: One, that there will be a cost added to the consumers in Manitoba; and secondly, that we are now putting on an additional tax which will have the eff ect of the development of jobs and surely, Mr.

Chairman, the Honourable Member from Thompson is not going to object to the fact that we bring to the attention of this Le gislature something that I am quite sure was never brought to the attention of the NDP caucus, that in fact Quebec have a different policy than this government at this particular time. Mr.

Chairman, one of the problems that the Minister of Finance has always had is the fact that the members opposite really have not known too much of what government policies have been, too much of what the government approach has been, and certainly they can't know what the government economic direction is because there's been nothing that I've known

168<t May 4, 1972 (MR. SPIVAK cont 'd) ••••• forthcoming from them, including the First Minister, that would indicate what the over-all objective is except they were going to have some signposts for the 70, and those signpo sts, Mr. Chairman, are going to be singpo sts for election. You know there are going to be signposts all over the place but there are not going to be any indi cations of how we are going to solve unemployment in this province, and the government because they are concerned about the raising of money for the carrying of programs rather than the paring of costs.

Reference is made to the previous government. The previous governme nt exempted production machinery. Why ? Why would they exempt production machinery if it wasn't for the fact that at that time they were concerned with job formation in the province. --(Inter jection) -- Yeah. Why weren't they concerned? Because, Mr.

Chairman, let's look at the logic of the dollars that were involved based, on the dollars that the Honourable Minister of Finance has prod uced, they could have reduced the sales tax to four percent, but the total effect of that woul d have been, and it wo uld have realized from the production machinery inclusion an amount of money equal to one percent and if they would have done that, what would have happened? You would have had a greater and more serious unemployme nt situation with more and more people leaving. That's the truth of the matter.

The fact of the matter is that industry, industry, the service industries, and the mining industry and the total industrial development has always been inhibited by problems that have to do with our geograp hy, have to do with our distance from markets, have to do with the distance of being able to obtain material, and it was necessary for at all times for Manitoba to be competitive.

The honou rable members in their igno rance - and you have to at this point express it in that way - in their complete ignorance of the realities out of the econ omic life of Canada, and the realities of the attempts by people to try and develop, to be able to sell their product in other markets, are again putting on a tax which will have the effect and the Honour able Member from Thompson wo n't accept it, will have the effect on a tax on jobs because it will in fact cause people to lose their jobs.

It will in fact cause people not to have jobs when they enter the labour fo rce, or when they lose their pos itions because of changes in technology, and they're going to have to look ou tside of Manitob a. And that should be on the conscience of the Member from Thompson who , you know, tries to poor mouth all the time about, or starts to criticize us because of our attitude.

Our concern at this point is that in terms of the economic conditions and all we have to do is look at the amount of public money being poured in to to try and hold an employme nt situation .that would be reasonable in this province, our concern is that what you are now doing because of your basic distaste for what is happening in terms of the private endeavour in this province - and that's anotlier way of saying it - a basic distaste and distrust.

What you are doing iS you are in fact inhibiting that development and growth. and you are taxing jobs, and continue to tax jobs and no matter how the Member for Thompson would like to approach it, the truth of the matter is he comes from a com munity that has suffered as a result of un employment. And he knows it and I know it. He knows what has happened when all of a sudden the foundation is shaken by people who never believed, never believed that they would be in a posi tion to have their jobs taken away from them, but they have, and those are con ditions that happen that he could not predict.

Now I say to the Hono urable Member from Thompson and I have some knowledge of what I am saying that by adding this tax - this is not a tax that can be added to with all the carrying charges to, and find that we are going to be competitive in the areas of the world. Yo u're mistaken about that. Other jurisdictions have recog nized it and they are exempting it. Ontario has put on a tax credit for this reason. --(Interjection) -- Useless, useless. How do you know it's useless ? How do you really know what the overall effect in Ontario would have been.

Well I must tell you, I must tell the Hon ourable Minister of Finance that we've done some checking too, and I would suggest to you that it's not as useless as he would like to say.

He talks as a Minister of Finance only interested in money but I'm suggesting to you that in fact if that had not been done that the overall econ omic develop ment and the actual capital and repair investment intentions fo r the previous year over the period of time would not have been as great, and I'm satisfied based on the representations that we've received fr om Ontario, and I'm also aware that the province and the province next to it, the province next to it has exempted it until 1975. MR. SCHREYER: Mr. Chairman, • • • as a matter of privilege the Honour able Leader

May 4, 1972 168 1 (MR. SCHREY ER cont'd) • of the Opposition has stated and implied on repeated oc casions in the past half hour that the Province of Quebec has imposed an exemption on pro duction machinery, and he stated that this applies to timbering production machinery, and that is definitely fal se. MR. SPIV AK: Mr. Chairman, I'm quite prepared to rea d again into the record the statement because the Honourable First Minister was not prese nt. -- (Interjection) -- Mr. Chairman, there are consumables used in mini ng which are taxed now which are exempt . You know what does production equipment mean?

You know people believe that production equipment means things that are substantial, that you can see, that you can touch, that are machinery. But the truth of the matter they include the whoie range of goods that are not in any way clearly defined in ordinary terms as production machinery, and the Honourable Minister knows it.

And one of the things that I think is a revelation to those people who have had exemptions in the sales tax that they have had to pay because ultimately the consumer of their products was paying a sales tax, is the realiza tion that the suppliers are now rais ing their costs, which means that they must now in turn raise their costs, which means that the sales tax now has to be collected on the increased costs -- (Interjec tion)-- Yeah, and high school economics, simple arithme tic.

But every businessman who is affected is going through the simple arithme tic and the Honourable Fi rst Minister, Honourable Fi rst Minister may not be concerned because he may believe, and very foo lishly, that it is a small group of people who are going to be affected, but the people who are going to be affected are the people who are going to find that a job has been lost in a particular factory because they have had to come to greater efficiency because of the increased costs. Well, you know the Honourabl e Member says no, the Honourable Minister sort of shakes his head, you know, he is not con cerned.

He doesn't believe it to be so. You know it is a very simple logic. The individuals are going to be able to deduct this from profits that they are going to make. And as I have indicated befo re, and I indicate again, on the basis of the logic of the Minister every increase by a supplier could be rational ized as being justified because the members were going to, or the people who are, they are buying the product, are going to be in a pos ition to be able to say, we can deduct it from our corporation profits.

And I don't think that the Honourable Minister of Finance even in the schoolboy arithmetic that he may apply, or the schoolboy economics, believes that that ration alization is taken ser iously by anybody in business. Mr. Chairman, the Honourable Member from Thompson does not appear to be con cerned about jobs, He really does not seem to be concerned about the effect now. No, he doesn't seem to be interested in the effect now. What he seems to be concerned about is talk ing about the past, over and over again. Mr.

Chairma n, we are dealing with a tax that will have an effect on our fut ure, Certainly Quebec has recognized it until 1975, and the reason for recognizing 1975 I think would appear, this is based on the information that we have, would appear to indicate their belief that we may be in for a recess ionary peri od that will continue for some time. For that re ason one wonders the logic of a government that would in fact put this tax on jobs. MR. CHAffiMAN: Clause 12 -- The Honourable Member for Fort Garry. MR. SHE RMAN : Mr.

Chairma n, in line with what we have said about the impact of this bill and the time it has taken for the ramifica tions of the legislation to reach every corner of the economic community, I would like to address to the Minister three or four areas of concern posed to me and to my party by one specific tradesmen's group, that trade being the welding trade, and by officials of the associa tion which looks after the public pro gram and policy of the welders in the Province of Manitoba. The fact of the matter as outlined by my leader and by colleagues of mine in this debate, Mr.

Chairman, is that there are many people engaged in many occupa tions in Manitoba that are being affected by this legislation who only now after a per iod of debate and public dissemi nation of the points of view raised in debate, and after an opportunity to study and examine the legislation in their own profess ional associati ons, and in the privacy of their own trade union groups and their own management groups, only now are they beginning to apprecia te the im pact of the legislation, the meaning and the ramifica tions of it in all its forms in their particu lar fields in industries.

This is the strongest case that we can mount for the length of debate as we have pursued it so far. This is the strongest justifi cation we can offer you, Sir, and the committee in total for the examination that we have brought to this legislation at such length.

1682 May 4, 1972 (MR. SHERMAN cont'

d) Had we been willing to judge the Bill superficially, and had we been unwilling to proceed as carefully and as minutely as we have done on the inner meanings and effects of the legis lation, some of the ramifications that are now coming to light, some of the consequences that are now causing concern throughout the economy, would have would have not surfaced at this time, would have remained obscured and unrecognized, and would, I submit, Mr. Chairman, have resulted in a serious condition, a serious economic situation and disadvantage for many many trade and industrial groups within the next few months.

The importance of the length of the debate has been that it has focused attention on aspects of the legislation that were not easily understood or recognizable and now they are revealing themselves , and this is our entire justification for pursuing it at the length that we have. I can advise you and the Minister and the Committee, Mr.

Chairman, that my own per sonal experience has been that since Monday of this week, since Monday of this week I have had enumerable representations made to me by telephone, by letter, by face to face contact from people concerned about this legislation who - these are people who did not understand it a week ago, and I would be less than candid if I suggested I understood it fully myself a week ago, and perhaps I don't even understand it fully today. I have been involved in legislative and parliamentary debate not long, Mr.

Chairman. but I have been involved in it long enough to know that there are very very few debates of a conscientious nature in the legislature or in parlia ment that do not at some continuing point in proceedings bring to light nuances and subtle ties that do not reveal themselves on the surface of a piece of legislation. I can honestly say that in my limited experience in the parliamentary process I have never sat through what I would consider a useless debate. Now this may be, Mr. Chairman, because I have never had the opportunity to serve in government, I have only been in opposition.

Perhaps had I had the experience of government I might be cynical about the opposition role, and I might take the attitude that some members on the opposite side do that this kind of exercise is useless and obstructive obstructionous. But the fact of the matter is that my experience has been in opposition and I say sincerely, Mr.

Chairman, that I have never sat through what I would consider to be a useless debate, no matter bow long a debate has gone on, it has at continuing points, and at the most unexpected points, revealed different perspectives and different aspects on the subtleties of the legislation before the House that were not recognizable in the short term, and it would never have surfaced in any superficial examination. So I submit in all conscience, Mr. Chairman, that we have a legitimate right and responsibility to do what we are do ing, and that we are meeting our responsibilities fully and properly and legitimately.

Now since Monday as I have said, Sir, I have had many representations from individuals and from groups many of whom I had not known before, in fact the existence of some of them I had not even known before, and only one example was a worried approach to me that was made only today, this morning, by a spokesman for the Welding Association and the Welders Supply Fi eld who informed me that his colleagues in that field, and in that industry, are ex tremely exercised about the position that the legislation puts them in.

He said to me that the removal of the exemption under this legislation constitutes a form of taxation that will hit a major supply, and a major supply activity involving all metal fabricating operations, all metal fabricating shops in the province because the metal fabricating process involves so many consumables. It involves for instance welding gases, Mr . Chairman; it involves a range of welding gases that includes oxygen, acetylene, argon, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and many more. All of these are consumables.

None of them can be tangibly touched, or packaged, or handed over in the finished product, but all of them are necessary to the finished product. They are used in every single manufacturing shop that is working with metal, and that is engaged in metal fabrication, and all of them come under the broad umbrella of consumables that would be affected, that would be taxed by the legislation before us, Mr. Chairman.

So, as a consequence of that the welding supply wholesalers and distributors take the position that they would, since they will have that additional cost built into their operation, they will have to pass that additional cost on. The manufacturer or the metal fabricator will pass the additional cost on, and in the end the consumer will face the increase in cost. Not only that but the argument that many of these people use, and I haven't heard it debunked by the Minister as yet, is that the legislation amounts, for persons in categories such as this, to a form of double taxation.

At least in the industry it amounts to a form of double taxation. There may not be an individual person in the process who is hit doubly, but the industry is hit

l May 4, 1972 1683 (1\ffi, SHERMAN cont'd) • doubly because in the first instance the consumables used in the process are taxed, are now taxable under the legislation, and in the se cond instance the finished product is of course · taxable in the sales tax area. Mr. Chairman, one of the specifics in this industry that one one must cite for the record at this point in the debate is fo r example a consumable such as tungsten electrode, tungsten electrode, It has been described to me as an ingredient, an electro metalic ingredient neces sary for wo rk done in the field of stainless steel and thus industries like Bristol Aerospa

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	29-4-65
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	29th 4th hansardpdf 65.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	fb3f96d7dc3b89d576c1a218bca504fe73fdf2da

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